Illegal Immigrants

[Amazon 7]

DUDE.. the people who WALKED to America just got here first.. thousands of years ago..... the mexicans are just following a very old tradition.

All the rest of you came by boat and plane.. are the immigrants
That said.... after laws and boundries are drawn.. there is a legal way to do it.... and if they cant do it in a legal manner... they need to go back to their source country and do it the right way.. get in line.!!!!

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

Immigrants are people who have moved from one country to another during thier lifetime. I suspect most white americans were born here.

I was verifying that you thought children born to illegal immigrants inside the US are not illegal immigrants. I mean, they didn't move from one country to another in their lifetime, right?

.jim

That wasn't my quote! You can't pin it on me!


Chuck

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

I'm still trying to figure out what he meant by that, where he read that in my post or where he is going with it.

He should run for public office! All those politicians do that!

Precisely. It seems that the straw man argument is as popular here as the race card.

You're killin' me here, man! Seems like big business and lyin' politicians have done their work selling their line of crap.


Chuck

[n23x 0]

Didn't mean to reply to you, or pin it on you. Sorry!

With regard to Richards, you never said that the born comment was exclusive to legally immigrated citizens, just trying to clarify.

.jim

"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

[masterrig 1]

Quote

DUDE.. the people who WALKED to America just got here first.. thousands of years ago..... the mexicans are just following a very old tradition.

All the rest of you came by boat and plane.. are the immigrants
That said.... after laws and boundries are drawn.. there is a legal way to do it.... and if they cant do it in a legal manner... they need to go back to their source country and do it the right way.. get in line.!!!!

Why, didn't you say that a long time ago? Could've saved a lot of hassle. We can go home now!


Chuck

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Didn't mean to reply to you, or pin it on you. Sorry!

With regard to Richards, you never said that the born comment was exclusive to legally immigrated citizens, just trying to clarify.

.jim

No problema, Ese!


Chuck

[Lindsey 0]

How much wood would a wood....

Quote

Chuck


Chuck

if a woodchuck would chuck wood.

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[masterrig 1]

Quote

How much wood would a wood....

Quote

Chuck


Chuck

if a woodchuck would chuck wood.

Oops! You're good!


Chuck

[Richards 0]

Quote

You're killin' me here, man! Seems like big business and lyin' politicians have done their work selling their line of crap.

I aim to please

It seems that these things tend to creep along into something bigger. I deplore gratuitous use of the slippery slope argument at the first sign of change but I will use it when I see a slipperry slope developing over time. Up here in the Peoples Multicultural Republic of Canuckistan we have had even more ridiculous policies on illegals, refugees, legal immigrants and all other manner of people coming here. It started with multiculturalism (by a whiny PM that most leaders laughed at) and led to Canada's refusal to deport anyone for anything including terrorists while simultaneously openning the doors wide open and leaving them ungaurded.

Now that our government has learned the power of the immigrant/refugee/squatter/newcomer vote they have tried all sorts of silliness to capitalize upon it. We have had them argue that landed immigrants who have not yet become citizens should be allowed to vote, they have tried to propose allowing refugees to vote, and in toronto they have even tried to allow "illegal immigrants" to vote so long as they can show that they are illegally employed and residing here because they are apparently an "integral part of the canadian fabric". None of these silly ideas have passed (thank god) but the fact that they are willing to even test the waters with them suggests to me that they will become reality in the future. Currently women can show up in a head to toe burka with face veil and vote in all levels of elections including federal without having to show that their face actually matches their ID.

Anyone who argues against it gets told that "we are all immigrants", and or told to "stop your whining because you people took this land from the natives" and an assortment of other silly non-arguments, most of which invoke some variant of the race card.

A border is your right to defend as is residency limitation.

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[Richards 0]

Quote

With regard to Richards, you never said that the born comment was exclusive to legally immigrated citizens, just trying to clarify.

No probem. Glad to clear that up for you.

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[SivaGanesha 2]

Quote

We the people of the United States, do have a voice. Just like we voice our opinions here, we can do the same with our politicians. They advertize e-mail sites and they have mailboxes. We just need to get busy...

Actually, there is already an organization, NumbersUSA, that helps people in lobbying Congress to restrict immigration, especially illegal immigration:

http://www.numbersusa.com

You can provide them with your profile--where you live, what your party affiliation is, etc--and they provide regular opportunities for you to fax Congress (at their expense) or call Congress (at your expense) when there is an importan immigration issue being debated. They provide the initial wording of all faxes but you can rewrite all such faxes in your own words as much or as little as you want.

NumbersUSA was critical in defeating the various Congressional attempts at amnesty for illegal immigrants earlier this year. I believe they have about 500,000 members and whenever Congress tries to support amnesty, the members show Congress their wrath with an avalanche of faxes.

There are other similar organizations but IMHO NumbersUSA is the best organized and the most disciplined. They are quite clearheaded in mapping out political strategies that are likely to work as opposed to just getting angry. Right now, they are actively promoting a new piece of legislation, the SAVE Act, which would substantially strengthen workplace enforcement without granting any kind of amnesty. NumbersUSA believes the SAVE Act has a chance to pass in the Democratic-controlled Congress because it was originally introduced by a Democrat.

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[billvon 3,111]

>NumbersUSA, that helps people in lobbying Congress to restrict immigration . . .

Wow, this is exactly backwards. We want to increase legal immigration and decrease illegal immigration. They are tied together; if you try to reduce total immigration you _guarantee_ most immigration will be illegal.

The problem is keeping out the people who want to come here and commit crimes - not the people who want to come here and work.

[SivaGanesha 2]

Quote

I suggest you contact your DZO and have him verify that your dropzone is illegal free.....I mean many seem to be very passionate about this....

This underscores why this is a very difficult issue to address. There are only specific limited circumstances in which you can ask specific people their status in the country and compel them to give a truthful answer. If someone is working as an independent contractor--as opposed to as an employee--they do not have to file an I-9 form and there is no way for a DZO--or anyone else--to legally determine their status. If someone does fill in an I-9 form and gives fraudulent--but apparently valid--info, there may also be very little a DZO can do about it.

This problem cannot be solved by DZO's or any other small business owners. It can only be solved with a change in legal and legislative climate such that government at all levels--local, state, and federal--are empowered to enforce existing law. As I noted in another post, NumbersUSA (www.numbersusa.com) is doing a very good job of lobbying for real change in this area. Enforcing immigration law is the job of Congress and the administration--expecting a DZO (or any other small business owner with better things to do) to do the job of Congress seems a little unfair to me.

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[ExAFO 0]

Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan.

Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW.

[SivaGanesha 2]

Quote

Wow, this is exactly backwards. We want to increase legal immigration and decrease illegal immigration. They are tied together; if you try to reduce total immigration you _guarantee_ most immigration will be illegal.

NumbersUSA would disagree with this perspective. They would say that when you allow someone to immigrate legally, it increases illegal immigration because all of their extended family then immigrates illegally in the hope that eventually they will be granted legal status because they have a US citizen family member. It is similar to the "anchor baby" situation--illegal immigrant parents hope that if they have one US citizen child, through birth in the US, the parents and older siblings will then have a foot in the door and be allowed to stay.

NumbersUSA seeks to completely eliminate illegal immigration and to reduce legal immigration by about 80%.

However, their focus right now seems to be mainly on the illegal side of the equation, so even if someone disagreed with their views on legal immigration, they would likely find NumbersUSA a strong ally when it comes to illegal immigration. By signing up for NumbersUSA, no one is compelled to send specific faxes with which they disagree. Someone can sign up for NumbersUSA and use it as a disciplined way to fax Congress (and others) about illegal immigration, while--if they choose--ignoring their point of view on legal immigration.

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[SivaGanesha 2]

Quote

Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan....

I'm sorry...I don't understand this post. Would you be willing to explain it?

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

You're killin' me here, man! Seems like big business and lyin' politicians have done their work selling their line of crap.

I aim to please

It seems that these things tend to creep along into something bigger. I deplore gratuitous use of the slippery slope argument at the first sign of change but I will use it when I see a slipperry slope developing over time. Up here in the Peoples Multicultural Republic of Canuckistan we have had even more ridiculous policies on illegals, refugees, legal immigrants and all other manner of people coming here. It started with multiculturalism (by a whiny PM that most leaders laughed at) and led to Canada's refusal to deport anyone for anything including terrorists while simultaneously openning the doors wide open and leaving them ungaurded.

Now that our government has learned the power of the immigrant/refugee/squatter/newcomer vote they have tried all sorts of silliness to capitalize upon it. We have had them argue that landed immigrants who have not yet become citizens should be allowed to vote, they have tried to propose allowing refugees to vote, and in toronto they have even tried to allow "illegal immigrants" to vote so long as they can show that they are illegally employed and residing here because they are apparently an "integral part of the canadian fabric". None of these silly ideas have passed (thank god) but the fact that they are willing to even test the waters with them suggests to me that they will become reality in the future. Currently women can show up in a head to toe burka with face veil and vote in all levels of elections including federal without having to show that their face actually matches their ID.

Anyone who argues against it gets told that "we are all immigrants", and or told to "stop your whining because you people took this land from the natives" and an assortment of other silly non-arguments, most of which invoke some variant of the race card.

A border is your right to defend as is residency limitation.

Well, ya' done good! I thought we had problems! I read recently where illegals from Mexico and Central America are rushing to Canada via Florida and through Windsor. Thank you for what you said about securing our border. What really scares me is, the crime that is happening not only along our border and some of our border towns but, it's filtering further into our 'heartland'. It's absolutely nuts!


Chuck

[masterrig 1]

Thank you, for that! I need to get busy... huh?


Chuck

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

Marzipan.
Marzipan.
Marzipan....

I'm sorry...I don't understand this post. Would you be willing to explain it?

It's an almond sugar paste, used to ice cakes.


Chuck

[billvon 3,111]

>They would say that when you allow someone to immigrate legally,
>it increases illegal immigration because all of their extended family then
>immigrates illegally . . .

Experience has shown that if you prevent them from immigrating legally, they immigrate illegally. A better solution would be to let the guy come here legally and then let his family come here legally as well - as long as they are willing to work.

[Andy9o8 2]

Karl: I've been making the same point as what you're (correctly) trying to say: that the European settlers and their descendants who displaced the Native Americans could quite properly be referred to as illegal immigrants - and that there's some irony in the shoe now being on the other foot. (And, from a historical perspective, there may be a certain parallel irony with the current "illegal immigrant" issue in South Africa; and I imagine a similar thing might be said about Australia and New Zealand, too.)

Richards: Like it or not, automatic US citizenship for anyone born in the US, without exception (and, so, regardless of the status of parentage), has been the law of the land since the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The 14th Amendment made it a Constitutional mandate in 1868. Personally, I think that's part of what makes the US a special place in the world; but that's me. Anyhow, as mentioned, it would now take a Constitutional amendment to change it - not an impossible process but, by design, a difficult one.

[SivaGanesha 2]

Quote

It started with multiculturalism (by a whiny PM that most leaders laughed at)...

Is the 'whiny PM' under discussion Chretien, Martin, or Harper?

If you are referring to Chretien, then I understand, but it also surprises me that Harper has not started to play hardball when it comes to illegal immigration.

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[Richards 0]

Quote

Well, ya' done good! I thought we had problems! I read recently where illegals from Mexico and Central America are rushing to Canada via Florida and through Windsor. Thank you for what you said about securing our border. What really scares me is, the crime that is happening not only along our border and some of our border towns but, it's filtering further into our 'heartland'. It's absolutely nuts!

The strange thing is I am quite fond of latin american culture and would welcome immigrants from that region, but it angers me that they have arrived on our doorstep claiming "refugee" status. Apparently by enforcing your immigration laws you are "persecuting" them. At the end of the day, the law is the law and they are breaking it yet portray themselves as victims.

Also it sounds like from what you are describing that you are getting the bottom of thier barrel with all the crime. If it is causing danger now to US citizens then the government needs to start doing it's job. The best you can do is keep pressure on those that you vote for so they clean the problem up.

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[Richards 0]

Quote

Experience has shown that if you prevent them from immigrating legally, they immigrate illegally. A better solution would be to let the guy come here legally and then let his family come here legally as well - as long as they are willing to work.

[Richards 0]

Quote

Richards: Like it or not, automatic US citizenship for anyone born in the US, without exception (and, so, regardless of the status of parentage), has been the law of the land since the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The 14th Amendment made it a Constitutional mandate in 1868. Personally, I think that's part of what makes the US a special place in the world; but that's me. Anyhow, as mentioned, it would now take a Constitutional amendment to change it - not an impossible process but, by design, a difficult one.