Compassion run amok - Bush's immigration policy


PDA






longeyes
December 24, 2003, 12:54 PM
Here we go. Compassion commingled with low-ball politics.
I'm glad La Raza is muy contento. You'd think Bush had never heard that we are in a global war.
-----------------------------------------

Immigration Reform on Bush Agenda

By Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 24, 2003; Page A01


President Bush plans to kick off his reelection year by proposing a program that would make it easier for immigrants to work legally in the United States, in what would constitute the most significant changes to immigration law in 18 years, Republican officials said yesterday.




Lobbyists working with the White House said Bush is developing a plan that would allow immigrants to cross the border legally if jobs are waiting for them. The sources said the administration also wants to provide a way for some undocumented workers in the United States to move toward legal status.

Bush will try to make the plan more palatable to conservatives by including stricter entry controls, including increased use of technology at the border and steps toward better enforcement of current visa restrictions and reporting requirements, sources said.

Bush said at his year-end news conference last week that he was preparing to send Congress recommendations for an "immigration policy that helps match any willing employer with any willing employee." He said he is "firmly against blanket amnesty," or a mass legalization. An estimated 8 million undocumented people live in the United States. At least half of them are Mexican, authorities said.

White House aides would not provide details of the proposal, but the Republican officials said it draws on, among other sources, a bill introduced by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). It would create a Web-based job registry, to be run by the Labor Department. Employers would post job opportunities that would be available first to U.S. workers and then to prospective immigrants, who would be allowed to come under a new visa for temporary workers.

The other half of the program would be what Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge referred to earlier this month as "some kind of legal status" for undocumented workers in this country. The sources said White House officials were more skeptical about this idea than about the temporary-worker program, but they concluded that they needed a response to the large population of undocumented workers for the plan to be credible and for Bush to get credit from Hispanic voters.

The blueprint is the most ambitious of its kind since a bill signed by President Ronald Reagan in 1986 that offered legal status to millions of illegal immigrants who had moved to the United States before 1982 and imposed sanctions on employers who knowingly hired illegal immigrants.

The White House plan is being designed by Bush's senior adviser, Karl Rove, in consultation with the domestic policy staff. Sources said the White House's biggest concern is that the new mechanism not penalize people who had followed the law and reward those who had not. McCain's plan, which was introduced in the House by Reps. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.) and Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), tries to mitigate that problem by creating a new type of visa for previously undocumented workers who would be allowed to live in the United States legally for three years. Then the workers could apply for the temporary worker visa, which would be the path to a green card, or legal permanent residency. That would amount to a three-year advantage for those who entered legally.

The Republican officials said that rather than proposing specific legislation, Bush may issue broad principles that would become part of what campaign officials call the "compassion agenda."

Administration officials said Bush will present his proposal, which is still being refined, in the second week of January, shortly before traveling to Monterrey, Mexico, for a two-day summit of leaders from throughout the Americas.

The proposal is crucial to Bush's relationship with Mexican President Vicente Fox, which was warm in Bush's first year in office but soured after he postponed any relaxation of immigration laws and Fox opposed the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. The two leaders began repairing the relationship during a meeting in October at an international economic summit in Thailand.

Bush, who said during his campaign that "family values don't stop at the Rio Grande," had been heading toward seeking an overhaul of immigration laws during his first year in office. On Sept. 6, 2001, Fox said during a White House visit that he wanted broad changes in U.S. immigration law within a year, and Bush said he hoped to "accommodate my friend."

But the plans were scuttled after the terrorist attacks five days later turned the government's attention toward restricting access to the country rather than easing it. Bush said in October 2002 that some noncitizens had "taken advantage" of America's "generous" immigration rules.

Some conservative lawmakers remain adamantly opposed to any changes that could be portrayed as encouraging immigration, and some members of the Republican congressional leadership are leery of the idea, making its outlook on Capitol Hill uncertain. But presidential advisers said they believe that Hispanic voters, one of the targets for Bush's reelection campaign, will give him credit for pushing for the changes even if nothing is enacted before the election.

Kolbe said in a telephone interview that "there's a mood for the first time since 9/11 that we have to take a look at this problem rather than just hardening the borders." He added, "The president's involvement will be critical."

A House GOP leadership aide, who insisted on anonymity, said the leaders are willing to work with Bush but think it will be a hard sell for rank-and-file members who are concerned that the plan could take jobs away from constituents. "The economic piece of it is now much more of a problem than your traditional xenophobia-type objections," the aide said.

Cecilia Muñoz, vice president for policy at the National Council of La Raza, a civil rights organization, said the danger is that Bush will propose something "that's going to sound vast and historic but that he knows can't get enacted next year."

"If what the White House proposes is credible, there's likely to be a warm response," Muñoz said. "As long as we get results, we're not going to be picky about the motive."

The proposal planned by the White House has much in common with plans that have been offered by some of the Democratic presidential candidates, most of which provide for a route to legalization for undocumented workers who have been in the country for five or six years, have a work history and can pass a background check.

Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (Mo.) calls his the Earned Legalization and Family Reunification program. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.) has called immigration reform "another broken promise" by Bush. Former Vermont governor Howard Dean told the Arizona Republic's editorial board that he favors earned legalization for undocumented workers who have been in the country for some time and have committed no crimes, but he sounded a note of skepticism about a guest-worker program like that proposed by McCain.

The Democrats have frequently highlighted their immigration plans in debates. A leading Bush adviser said that, given the crucial swing vote Hispanics could provide next November, "the White House feels it's got to get its irons in the fire now."

If you enjoyed reading about "Compassion run amok - Bush's immigration policy" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Jonesy9
December 24, 2003, 01:41 PM
so Bush flip flopped on blankey amnesty in an election year, otherwise he would have passed it for his cheap labor conservtive supporters.

Do you commies have something against using illegals to boost profits? Do you hate capitalism? Remeber, these are jobs you'd never do so why not open the spicket for illegals? With good english you can be a greeter at Wal Mart.

Drjones
December 24, 2003, 02:44 PM
Compassion run amok - Bush's immigration policy

Or, how bush may have just lost my vote.

I read about this on the front page of my local paper, but couldn't find it on their website to post here.

I cannot believe this....this is sickening.... :cuss:

HBK
December 24, 2003, 02:49 PM
Ridiculous. The first thing we should've done after 9-11 was close our borders. We have enough people here already anyway. Illegals shouldn't be given one red cent of taxpayer money. I don't know if it is enough to make me not vote for Bush, though, especially if it means that incompetent loser Howard Dean is running our country.

Drjones
December 24, 2003, 02:51 PM
incompetent loser Howard Dean is running our country.

Communist. You mean communist.

And an incompetent loser as well.

Waitone
December 24, 2003, 03:03 PM
I sense a political miscalculation is afoot.

Bush wants to "deal" with the issue. He wants a guest worker program. He also wants latino votes. I don't think any reasonable American could disagree with the premise that something should be done. Problem is we already have laws in place. The problem is government at all levels is actively breaking the law. So now we can fix a problem of lawlessness by enacting new laws.

No, the isse is two fold. Bush and other democrats want the latino vote, pure and simple pander politics.

Second, for some reason Bush thinks he has to suck up to V. Fox. I can't think of any reason other than cheap labor and oil as being the reason. Mexicos largest export is labor. The country gets more currency from wages flowing from the US to Mexico than it does from the selling of Mexican oil. Leave it to V. Fox to turn welfare into a cash crop.

Don't get me wrong. We live in a country where the birth rate of its residents does not reproduct itself. If we are to avoid the fate of the UK and France and to some extent Chermany we must get the birth rate up or inport warm bodies. The economic ladder is a reality and we must have people willing to step on the lower rung. No problem with the reality of economics.

Where I get my BVD's wadded up is I can't tell where the truth stops and lying starts from Bush and his fellow corporatists. I don't trust him to deal with the problem illegal immigration because I sense he will slip the US voter the weenie in one form or fashion. Bush wants amnesty but he doesn't dare use the word, so he will do a Clinton.

I just don't think Dubya has a feel for how much hatred there is out there for the concept of amnesty for illegal entry into the US. I could support an amnesty if it was combined with a realistic guest worker program and a serious attempt to gain control of the borders, but at this point I consider Bush to be a liar and every thing he says about illegal immigration is a lie.

Back to the political miscalculation. Could be by pushing amnesty before the election Bush will hand a crippled democrat party a major issue. I just don't see his amnesty games buying him votes. I see it costing him votes.

Drjones
December 24, 2003, 03:10 PM
Someone on another forum said this:

This one is a lot like various gun laws in that there are plenty of rules on the books which would work just fine. They aren't enforced. Do you think there would be a demand for illegals if Customs (or whoever is enforcing INS rules these days) hammered everyone they caught hiring them per the laws that already exist? I might be wrong about this, but the number I heard associated per count with hiring illegals is $10,000. Do you think there would be much of a market if every landscaping company, dry wall hanging company, Dennys, etc. got a $10,000 fine per illegal on their roles? It's a matter of applying the laws that already exist, there's no need for new ones.

And I think he makes a fine point.

Art Eatman
December 24, 2003, 04:44 PM
Question: If there are indeed eight million illegals here in the U.S., how does anybody suggest we deal with the physical problem of finding them? Holding them within some form of detention? Of--within our laws--expelling them?

Anybody want to guesstimate the direct costs, plus legal costs? And tell us from what budgets these monies will come?

Anybody have any idea of the present cost per illegal in dealing with those now caught and sent away?

Art

HBK
December 24, 2003, 04:54 PM
Well, a 100 round box of Winchester 9mm is around 11 dollars. Two shots per each illegal, 11 dollars for 50 illegals. Do the math.

Disclaimer: Although it is in poor taste, it is a joke. I don't REALLY condone shooting illegals. I think deportation is a much better option. As far as the "they do the jobs no one else will do" argument goes, reserve those jobs for people on welfare. AND CLOSE OUR BORDERS!

Coltdriver
December 24, 2003, 05:33 PM
I wondered about this lunacy. But I think I know the real reason for it.

The social security system outlays will have a direct impact on discretionary spending in 2006, that is discretionary spending will be reduced in 2006 because the impact of social security will bite into what is left. It gets much worse every year up to 2012 when nearly 100 percent of all government income is spent on social security and medicare.

So the politicians are trying to capture all the taxable income they can by letting these illegals have legal status here. And taxing them.

And I don't believe the number is less than 14 million of them.

Waitone
December 24, 2003, 05:59 PM
You betcha social security's impending implosion is at the foundation. Ponzi's scheme is ready to collapse. Ponzi schemes work only so long as the base continues to expand. SS's base is money, not headcount.

The economic advantage of hiring illegals is the employer does not have to pay payroll tax. It is off the books and untraceable.

Legalizing their status to harvest the revenues will defeat the reason for bidness to hire illegals.

We are losing jobs in this country precisely because the direct and indirect loading of labor with government mandated "benefits" which drives the cost of US labor well past international competitive rates. Rather than reduce government loading of US labor, Bush and his ilk prefer to wink at the law and carve out exemptions which all corporations to escape government mandated costs.

longeyes
December 24, 2003, 06:08 PM
There is no inexpensive solution to the illegal problem at this point. And the cost may be more than financial; it may blood and the survival of our culture. We have ourselves to thank for that; a critical mass has developed and grown to the point where all potential solutions have become draconian. Cutting off public benefits along with enforcing employer penalties would at least clarify the size of the problem and tell us what we might have to do next.

What is most galling is Bush's blatant politicizing of this situation. He is willing to sell out the American people to win the Election. Not a hopeful sign for that second term, which will no doubt witness both a full-throttle go-forward of global corporatism combined with rising dissatisfaction among the American serfs most affected.

Waitone mentions a very important issue: keeping our work force non-geriatric. Demography rules. Europe and Japan are destined, if current trends continue, to have populations with an average age of over 50 down the road. That means not only the end of the welfare state but probably second- or third-tier status for those blocs. Bush, if he were at least an honest politician, could make an argument for more immigration to lower the average age of our work force. Or he could, throwing caution to the wind, make a public argument for our "native" population to have more children and attempt to provide appropriate government incentives. Instead he does neither; he operates by stealth and b.s. The trouble with the way we are handling the immigration situation goes further: we seem to be unable to come to grips with the need to Americanize our immigrants, not insisting on language skills, culture indoctrination (let me be blunt), or allegiance. What is the point of bringing in new blood if the new blood proves to be an alien nation within your midst.

Erik
December 24, 2003, 06:29 PM
I agree that we should make it easier for aliens to legally neter the US to work in positions which are hard toplace with legal residents and citizens. (Something which already occurs, by the way.)

I disagree that we should afford any sort of legal status to illegal aliens.

Standing Wolf
December 24, 2003, 06:49 PM
Obvious solution: fine every employer $100,000 for each illegal alien on the pay roll.

WilderBill
December 24, 2003, 07:36 PM
Joensy9, I bet you HAVE a job!!?
I think we have enough people on welfare to cover most of the hard to fill jobs, if only we could get them to take some of them.
The cost of doing anything about this problem IS high.
The cost of doing nothing will be higher.
There are no easy solutions.

QuickDraw
December 24, 2003, 09:57 PM
I, like many here will be watching closely.
I'm already thinking of a "protest non vote" for Pres.
I'm a 2 issue voter,1.illegal immigration 2.assault weapons ban.
Time will tell if I stay home in November!

QuickDraw

Thumper
December 25, 2003, 10:57 AM
why not open the spicket for illegals? With good english you can be a greeter at Wal Mart.

With good english you can spell "spigot." :neener:

Tamara
December 25, 2003, 11:05 AM
Obvious solution: fine every employer $100,000 for each illegal alien on the pay roll.

How about fining them $1,000,000,000 for each one? It'd fix the deficit! Heck, why not behead them? It's no less nonsensical. :uhoh:

longeyes
December 25, 2003, 12:29 PM
With the ability to bring in (seemingly) cheap labor at uncontrolled rates thanks to a de facto open border policy and the ability to export jobs abroad thanks to a free movement of capital policy we are setting the stage for what could be a mass "swapping out" of the population of the United States. The old population was a problem, you see, liberty-loving as it was, and recalcitrant to principles of global business. Therefore, the old population is obsolete, worn-out, and needs to be re-built from the ground up. Bush knows this, but dang if he ain't keeping this vision to himself.

Is there a solution for America's dying middle class? Yes, do what other countries did (and do: GIT! If you are young and gutsy enough, take your brains, your values, your will, and your tools, and go to a backward Third World country and get thee rich. They can use smart Americans who know the way of the world over there. Just make sure they aren't too xenophobic.

Waitone
December 25, 2003, 12:38 PM
Actually in the high tech sector there are stories of Americans moving to India in search of jobs.

No different that the dust bowl days. Go to where the jobs are.

wolf
December 25, 2003, 02:22 PM
in parts of los angeles (the mayor declared LA to be a "mexican city") you would be hard pressed to be sure you are in the USA..mexican flags..no english heard..shanty towns in open view..yep its a mexican city..just like the country they left..so they can feel at home..

what did the open border folks think would happen?? millions of uneducated, poor people flood a certain geographical local..blow the wage base out of the middle class..do not assimulate..and in 25 years it becomes the very country they left.

HBK
December 25, 2003, 02:53 PM
That's why we should CLOSE the border. :fire:

longeyes
December 25, 2003, 04:59 PM
It will take nothing less than a tax revolt to close the borders. If that.

Tamara
December 25, 2003, 05:39 PM
It will take nothing less than a tax revolt to close the borders. If that.

Seeing as how the combined military might of NATO and the Warsaw Pact couldn't close the most heavily-guarded border in the history of the human race (which was considerably shorter than our borders,) I suspect it'll take something more than a "Tax Revolt."

Maybe eldritch magic or a quick re-write of the laws of physics would do the trick.

longeyes
December 25, 2003, 09:55 PM
I've never been accused of being an optimist but perhaps this was the first time. :D

I think Bush-Rove is a stubborn man but his fatal flaw is wanting to be loved and thought a bringer of sweetness and light. Massive public rejection might sway him. Either he doesn't know that the majority of Americans are not behind him on this issue or he is guided by an "angelic" vision whose provenance we probably don't want to know about.

Then again perhaps even a tea party would not avail. We may very well see.

ahenry
December 26, 2003, 07:46 AM
I get so sick of all this screaming for the gov’t to “close the borders”. It really ticks me off for two separate reasons. First, it’s physically impossible to do. I wish that just once somebody would utter those words and actually have a clue how to accomplish them. Granted more could be done but “close the border”, it’s impossible for a myriad of reasons. Secondly, why must everybody look to the gov’t for solutions to issues? Granted there is a purpose for gov’t and that’s to achieve objectives that individuals cannot, but I fail to see anything but pleading for the almighty gov’t to save us all. That’s not the attitude America was built with and its damn sure not the attitude that will keep America going.

longeyes
December 26, 2003, 11:57 AM
And some of us get sick of people who keep saying the Government can do nothing when, frankly, IT IS THEIR JOB TO DO SOMETHING. Perhaps the Government can't stop the influx completely at the border but they could, if they were so ordered, stop a great deal of it. All that is required is the political will. We are trying to interdict border crossings elsewhere in the world but for some reason we can't protect our own. The Government can also take some steps to control public benefits to illegal aliens and enforce existing laws against employers hiring illegals. All of this, ahenry, you know perfectly well.

Are you arguing for vigilantes or a ten million person march on D.C.? What? It's clear that this Administration is guided by an inner light on this subject, but the light isn't emanating from On High but rather from the temples of Karl Rove and a small cast of plutocrats. The Government would like nothing better than to quash citizen action at the border, and they've already tried more than once. I think the official policy, de facto, of this Administration is identical to the one before it: BRING 'EM ON.

obiwan1
December 26, 2003, 12:18 PM
The most effective things that can be done can only be done by government. No welfare or government handouts for illegals. Enforce laws against employers hiring illegals. If there is no economic benefit to be here, they will not come. Also, the National Guard can patrol the borders. Unfortunately, there seems to be no political will to protect this country.:confused:

harpethriver
December 26, 2003, 03:23 PM
The issue for Bush is not immigration(legal or not)it's votes. Plain and simple W is doing what any incumbent(or non-incumbent for that matter)would and will do-pander for votes to a powerful ethnic constituency. The problem I have with it is not that Bush is a whore for votes, it's that we citizens and our safety are his currency.

MicroBalrog
December 26, 2003, 03:29 PM
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she

With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"


http://www.smfc.k12.ca.us/class/laurel/lalosh/statue.jpg

HBK
December 26, 2003, 03:33 PM
The tired, the poor, the huddled masses need to enter the country LEGALLY, not ILLEGALLY. :rolleyes:

MicroBalrog
December 26, 2003, 03:37 PM
Than such opportunity needs to be presented.

HBK
December 26, 2003, 03:39 PM
That opportunity IS presented. We have legal immigration.

MicroBalrog
December 26, 2003, 03:42 PM
With quotas. Gimme a break.

HBK
December 26, 2003, 03:48 PM
So you think illegal immigration is okay? How would it be if Israel opened her borders and gave any islamic fundamentalist suicude bombing nut job that wanted to come in a free pass? How long do you think Israel would exist? THe principle is the same, but the US is bigger so it would just take longer to wreak the same amount of havoc.

MicroBalrog
December 26, 2003, 03:54 PM
Uhm, we let ANYBODY in, they just need to have Jewish relative, and we're negotiationg to let huge amounts of "Islamics" in, thank you.

And what havoc was wroken by the generations of US immigrants?

And no, illegal immigration is not fine. It should be legal.

HBK
December 26, 2003, 04:04 PM
Your mistake. I don't see the wisdom in allowing people that you know HATE you and your country unfettered access to your country.

As far as the havoc wrought by US immigrants, there are two types. THe immigrants that came here LEGALLY searching for a better life became part of the the backbone of our country. The ILLEGAL immigrants have not become a productive part of our society. The havoc wrought would be the costs they have presented to our taxpayers through welfare and health care systems, as well as the jobs they take from our citizens. And yeah, I can see the "but they do jobs that no one else will do" argument coming. As to that, we should abandon our welfare system and allow the people living off of the government dole take those jobs that no one wants so that they may actually EARN a living.

We have immigration laws on the books. We should follow them and deport the illegals that are already here and prevent more illegals from coming and draining our budget.

MicroBalrog
December 26, 2003, 04:07 PM
So that's what we're talking about, HBK. When the immigration quota is 55,000 people OF COURSE you'll have illegal immigrants.

HBK
December 26, 2003, 04:08 PM
And you let anybody in, they just have to have a jewish relative? What the heck is that? We don't require our legal imimigrants to have a relative here. That's not letting "ANYBODY" in, that's a pretty stringent requirement.

HBK
December 26, 2003, 04:10 PM
A country can only hold so many people, dude. I think the quotas are a good thing and if anything, they allow too MANY people, not too few.

MicroBalrog
December 26, 2003, 04:12 PM
And you let anybody in, they just have to have a jewish relative?

Not an Israeli relative. A JEWISH relative, even if he lives in Alaska.

A country can only hold so many people, dude. I think the quotas are a good thing and if anything, they allow too MANY people, not too few

Tell that to the Japanese.

55,000 is too MANY?:what:

HBK
December 26, 2003, 04:18 PM
That is a lot less stringent than i thought, but how do you guard against fraud?
The Japanese need to use some birth control or something. If you lived here, in the country, you would see how great this place is. Think of a fish tank. You can have an inch of fish per gallon of water. If you have too many, they will suffocate. A country is the same way. You should only have so many people per square mile. We have space here. If the Japanese or any other culture that breed like rabbits have bred themselves into a corner, that's their problem. They don't need to make it ours.

MicroBalrog
December 26, 2003, 04:24 PM
We practically don't, all you need is a marriage/birth certificate.

If the Japanese can be as well off as they are having 866.4 people per square mile, and Israel can handle 731.6, why can't the US?

HBK
December 26, 2003, 04:30 PM
I don't think they ARE well off. I think they are packed in like sardines in a can. Even in our cities here like Seattle and Charlotte I feel suffocated. Can't even imagine going to NEw York or LA. If you were to live here, you might understand. When you finally immigrate here, I think you'll see what I mean.

MicroBalrog
December 26, 2003, 04:32 PM
I lived in the city since I was born, do not feel "suffocated" at all.:)

HBK
December 26, 2003, 04:34 PM
You just don't know any better. ;)

cdbeaver
December 26, 2003, 06:02 PM
Let me see if I've got this right:

If I'm not a citizen of the U. S., I can slip into the country across the Canadian or Mexican border, bring my family if I like, get a job and not worry too much about getting arrested. If I do get caught, I MAY be sent back across the border after a lengthy legal process. And if I am caught and deported, my employer will simply replace me with another illegal alien.

If I carry a concealed weapon without proper licensing, even though I have never been in trouble with the law before and even though the Second Amendment says I have the right, I WILL be arrested, charged with a felony and probably be sent to the slammer, and never be permitted to own a firearm again.

The justice of all this is . . .

4v50 Gary
December 26, 2003, 06:35 PM
Actually, that's the way it use to be until Cesar Chavez (UFW) lobbied to have it changed. The UFW then used it to demand higher wages for those who were here legally. It may reduce labor costs for farm jobs, but also affects skilled positions such as heavy equipment operators, etc.

ahenry
December 26, 2003, 07:03 PM
55,000 is too MANY? Where do you get your numbers? I do believe you are mistaken…

Glock Glockler
December 26, 2003, 07:40 PM
Solutions

1 - Deep Six the rather luscious welfare State we have built up.

I know of Mexicans in South West who work hard and do a lot of job Americans old rather not do, this is fine, but it becomes unfine when they absolutely juice the welfare system to it's fullest extent. Any economic benefit they might be producing is going to be lost when it is dwarfed by how much they drain from the economy from increased welfare expenditures that the taxpayer must bare. If people want to work, fine, if thier employer wants to give them any benies, fine, but no one else should be made to pay for the benies of illegals, or legals for that matter.

2 - Instead of kissing Vincente Fox's behind, invite him to kiss ours.

He seems to spend his efforts trying to influence our policies so that Mexicans may gain from us. Instead of training his people to be parasites that exist off of us and only produce when they are within our borders, maybe he should try fixing his own country. Mexico, despite its abundace of natural resources and large population, remains poor. I wonder if it ever occured to them that the reason why they're poor might be their socialist policies and cultural attitudes.

If they want assistance, I'll be more than happy if the govt contract to have the Cato institute and a bunch of other think tanks tell them how to unfoxtrot their country along with any other country in the world, but they have to become self-producing and self-sufficent, not parasites that beg the US for help every time something bad happens.

Micro,

Suppose it's in the middle of WWII and Hans Schneider, formerly of the Hitler Youth and the Waffen SS wants to immigrate, along with a few thousand of his buddies with similar backgrounds. Do you think it a wise idea for us to throw our arms up and invite them in? If your country has an open door policy then I just lost a little respect for Israel. How many homicide bombings can you sustain? How many radical Muslims are therein the world that would be willing to sacrifice themselves if it means helping to destroy Israel?

Art Eatman
December 27, 2003, 12:33 AM
MB, this daggoned country is already overcrowded. You might be happy with the density of Hong Kong or suchlike, but I'm not.

Next, there is a net cost to the taxpayer when immigrants do not possess those skills which allow earning wages above the minimum. That's a large part of the cause of California's budget deficit. It's also hurting the Arizona budget. And this has zilch, zip, nada to do with any sort of safety-net welfare; it has to do with the real costs these people create: Crime, medical, welfare in general.

We're not talking small numbers, either. We're talking millions per year coming over the border, with things as they now are in the realm of enforcement efforts. With existing successful illegal immigrants now far beyond those numbers which can readily assimilate into our culture, why would we want to open our borders to any body who wants to come here?

What country could survive with an increase of three to five percent per year population increase, and of non-acculturated people? Life here in the U.S. nowadays isn't as much fun as it was a hundred million people ago...

Art

HBK
December 27, 2003, 12:35 AM
Well said, Art.

seeker_two
December 27, 2003, 01:45 AM
Well, a 100 round box of Winchester 9mm is around 11 dollars. Two shots per each illegal, 11 dollars for 50 illegals. Do the math.

HBK: Good ideal, but that's still a lot of bullets. .22lr's are cheaper...:evil:

MicroBalrog: Considering the problems that Israel seems to be having w/ its own Islamic "immigrants", I'd be skeptical of using your version of immigration laws. :rolleyes:

George W. Bush: You have FAILED in providing for the security of the United States. You have repeatedly pushed to allow illegal aliens to be rewarded for flaunting immigration laws. You have harassed American citizens at airports and train terminals while leaving the southern border unmonitored. Your federal agencies have actively campaigned against American citizens protecting themselves from illegal aliens who infest & destroy said citizens' properties and person (i.e. Ranch Rescue). And you have promised to CONTINUE to do so when re-elected.

If you take your oath to "protect and defend" this nation, you will place military units on the border to intercept and repulse this illegal invasion. Anything short of that is worthless. Until then, you no longer have my vote or my support.

:fire: :fire:

fallingblock
December 27, 2003, 02:00 AM
"I lived in the city since I was born, do not feel "suffocated" at all."
************************************************************

Uh, Micro, you may already have been suffocated by urban ideology.:D


Art, true indeed:
************************************************************
"What country could survive with an increase of three to five percent per year population increase, and of non-acculturated people? Life here in the U.S. nowadays isn't as much fun as it was a hundred million people ago..."
************************************************************

The quality of life and the excercise of freedom do not depend upon how many humans can be packed into a space. Population density does confer dignity or liberty.

Rather, it's the willingness of those humans to participate in making a contribution to the quality of life and supporting the freedom of their new nation by LEGALLY immigrating. Illegal immigration is the act of a criminal.

MicroBalrog
December 27, 2003, 06:27 AM
Where do you get your numbers? I do believe you are mistaken…

That's what they told me when I wanted to apply.

Considering the problems that Israel seems to be having w/ its own Islamic "immigrants", I'd be skeptical of using your version of immigration laws

Seeker_Two, we have little problems with Islamic citizens of Israel - the problem is with the Palestinians.

ahenry
December 27, 2003, 10:18 AM
And some of us get sick of people who keep saying the Government can do nothing when, frankly, IT IS THEIR JOB TO DO SOMETHING. I don’t disagree that the gov’t has a responsibility to act, and indeed they are. You are just unwilling to admit it because those actions are not what you wish would happen.

All that is required is the political will. We are trying to interdict border crossings elsewhere in the world but for some reason we can't protect our own. There are difficulties to what you ask that are unique to America and our way of life that do not have real solutions. Moreover, it is extremely disingenuous to imply that we are not trying to “interdict border crossers” here in America. Every year hundreds of thousands of “border crossers” are interdicted and either arrested and punished or returned to their country. When people are willing to travel thousands of miles to get to the American border and then pay thousands of dollars to be smuggled into America you have a situation unlike any other border in the world.

The Government can also take some steps to control public benefits to illegal aliens and enforce existing laws against employers hiring illegals. As you know I very much agree with you on this point. However, I think you are looking to the wrong gov’t to do this. Your new governor there in CA has moved in the right direction in one small area and you should pressure him to keep going.

Are you arguing for vigilantes or a ten million person march on D.C.? In that I am “arguing” for anything, it is for you (collectively speaking) to approach this issue properly. The federal government is not the first solution to a problem it is the last one. One must always begin trying to solve an issue first without any gov’t help, then down the road if the problem requires, the smallest and most local gov’t possible. For instance, the three main border states shell out billions of dollars in hospital care and education for illegal aliens. Should the federal gov’t eliminate that? No, its not the federal gov’ts money, California should take care of California.

ahenry
December 27, 2003, 10:20 AM
That's what they told me when I wanted to apply. I don’t keep up with the numbers but I believe that you might be thinking of one particular type of immigration visa. Yes we have quotas but we have different amounts that we allow in for different types of visas. For instance, if you were trying to immigrate as professional worker with a degree (a numerically limited visa) and that limit had been reached, someone else attempting to immigrate as say a professional with an advanced degree (also a numerically limited visa) might still be able to immigrate. Under the Immigration Act of 1990 immigration is capped at 700,000 people per year and certain types of immigrants (refugees for examples) don't even fall under that cap.

seeker_two
December 27, 2003, 01:20 PM
Seeker_Two, we have little problems with Islamic citizens of Israel - the problem is with the Palestinians.


And are the Palestinians legal immigrants? I didn't think so...:p

Your illegals blow themselves up in public. Ours suck community resources dry & violate our laws. Both groups are an equal threat to our countries. And they should be ousted ASAP...:fire:

longeyes
December 27, 2003, 02:10 PM
Fiscal suicide bombers.

Perhaps the "mystery" of Bush's immigration policies can be traced to the fact that brother Jeb's wife was born in Mexico. Does it get any simpler than that?

Waitone
December 27, 2003, 03:11 PM
Fiscal suicide bombers.Valid for now.

One of the latino racist website has referred to illegal aliens in the US as "American Palestinians."

Honest to goodness suicide bombers are only time away.

Frank5
December 27, 2003, 08:54 PM
There have some good points made on this topic. I would like to make a couple more.

Illegal aliens are criminals...........period. So long as an illegal is on US soil & not in custody,he/she is committing a crime. Yes.....I do believe that illegal entery to the US is a crime.

If they are working under the table then it's tax evasion. (a crime) If they are working above board & paying taxes then they lied on the federal form they had to fill out concerning the right to work in the US.....OR the employer is in violation of the law. Entering false info on that form is also a crime.

If someone wants to immigrate to the US,a good place to start would be to have some respect for our laws.

The feds need to hammer the hell out of employers who hire illegals. The fines should be astronomical and/or company officials should face criminal charges in federal court.

No unlawful immigrant should get any kind of public assistance whatsoever. If there's kids involved...........they should be deported with the adults.

Strict & aggressive enforcement of what's contained in the last 2 paragraphs will go a long way to solving this problem. If they cant get welfare & can't get jobs.........a lot less of them will come.

Drjones
December 29, 2003, 03:08 PM
If the Japanese can be as well off as they are having 866.4 people per square mile, and Israel can handle 731.6, why can't the US?

The only reason that countries like Japan and Israel exist is because of the US with our vast expanses of open farmland which we use to raise animals for meat, eggs, milk, etc. as well as grow vegetables that we export to countries like Japan and probably Israel.

Micro, I find it odd how you claim to be so passionate about US issues like constitutional rights and the like, but want to destroy us through other means.

harpethriver
December 29, 2003, 03:23 PM
Politicians must love you guys. You rail ad nauseum about the issue of immigration while the politicians throw up a smoke screen to divert your attention from the issue they've managed to turn it in to-and a very sel-serving one at that-VOTES!! This is a classic case of politicians doing what's best for the party(and their own political butts)at the expense of the citizens interests they're supposed to serve. Get a grip people-this isn't about immigration or the safety of our citizens-it's about pandering for votes to an ethnic voting block enabled by a complicit media and sheeple for readers/voters.

Drjones
December 29, 2003, 03:33 PM
Politicians must love you guys. You rail ad nauseum about the issue of immigration while the politicians throw up a smoke screen to divert your attention from the issue they've managed to turn it in to-and a very sel-serving one at that-VOTES!! This is a classic case of politicians doing what's best for the party(and their own political butts)at the expense of the citizens interests they're supposed to serve. Get a grip people-this isn't about immigration or the safety of our citizens-it's about pandering for votes to an ethnic voting block enabled by a complicit media and sheeple for readers/voters.

Uh, yeah, most people here understand that and your "radical" idea has actually been mentioned several times already in this thread, nostradamus.

Welcome to THR...:rolleyes:

:D

harpethriver
December 29, 2003, 03:57 PM
Radical-wow-thanks for the compliment-I feel like I'm back in college-think I'll let my hair grow out again-oops-I forgot-don't have enough left to do that-which might explain how you've confused me with Nostradamus-he's old too-isn't he? Having a keen sense for the obvious-and being able to read(barely)I noticed my points had previously been mentioned-once even by myself, however it appeared that some of us either were oblivious, have ADD, or entirely too much time on our hands. Next time I need to know "what most people here understand " I'll know where to check. Thanks for the welcome!! And yes, I really do have thick skin, can't you tell?

Obiwan
December 29, 2003, 04:31 PM
I am all for the administrations plan...

And I hope the unspoken caveat is that if you are not ;

A. Part of a legal employment plan

B. A citizen or legal alien

Then you get shipped home...like right now!

At least they are doing something other than ignoring the problem.

And please...those who advocate shooting illegals...stop trying to help!

Waitone
December 30, 2003, 12:17 PM
Last night I heard an intersting factoid. The only time I got to listen to a Michael Savage show front to back. He posted a poll on his website asking if the voter supported amnesty for illegal aliens. In 2 weeks he got 6.5 million votes. Point 1> He has software that prevents multiple votes, point 2> his listening audience is estimated to be 6 to 8 million listeners. Poll results show 95% of the voters opposed amnesty for illegal aliens. He has repeatedly asked the White House for access to Karl Rove for an explanation of his position and is refused.

He intends to get to 10 million votes then go back to the white house for an explanation.

wingman
December 30, 2003, 12:40 PM
What Americans Are Saying About Illegal Immigration
By Frosty Wooldridge
Dec 29, 2003, 00:45


Frosty Wooldridge -- Each week, newspapers across the nation report on illegal immigration as if it's a soap opera drama desperate for sympathy and acceptance. "We came here for a better life," a mother of six sobs into the journalist's tape recorder. "My children deserve an education.."



One week, papers report on a child from Latin America whose parents smuggled her into the United States for a heart transplant at $200,000.00. The next, we see a child whose parents have been selling drugs from their Los Angeles apartment for rent money. The drama continues week in and week out. Twenty years ago, it made for great human-interest stories. It's true! There is so much human misery outside the United States in Africa, the Middle East, South America and Asia-that it tears at your heart. The AIDS epidemic in Africa will kill 40 million in this decade. Starvation and related diseases kill 38,000 children under the age of 10, DAILY around the globe according to the World Health Organization. This crisis for humanity staggers one's imagination.



However, it's coming to America in the form of an invasion of millions who are escaping the misery of their countries only to create the same misery in our country. Already in cities and towns across America, this invasion affects and is crippling our schools, hospitals and infrastructure. Our gridlocked highways, air pollution, water availability, diseases and standard of living worsen with this onslaught. Our national debt, at $6.8 trillion, soars to the point of imminent collapse. Shantytowns pop up in El Paso, Phoenix, Mexicali, Los Angeles and many other cities. This crisis rips at the foundation of our country's viability as a sovereign and functioning nation.



Today, with 10 to 15 million illegal aliens operating in the United States as well as an illegal underground railroad bringing in nearly a million more annually, this invasion imports the Third World into our country. Right now, there are over 80 safe houses in the United States that create forged documents and send new illegal aliens off to jobs that 'Americans won't do.' Their stories and their problems are wearing thin on Americans who have fought and died for this country's freedoms and rule of law. They wear even worse on the 18 million Americans displaced by H-1B visas, depressed wages and those whose neighborhoods and schools have been taken over by foreign languages. It's wearing thin on Americans that our insulated Congress refuses to stop this crisis. Ironically, our leaders encourage it with such policies as the Dream Act, H-1B visas, total lack of enforcement at our borders even after 9/11, refusing to prosecute illegal alien employers and forcing Americans to pay for hospital care, anchor babies and schooling for illegals.



Below are a few things Americans are saying across the country:



Jan of Colorado writes: "Well, I've had it. It seems the porch light is on at the White House but nobody's home. When will Bush and Karl Rove see that their efforts to promote amnesty to border jumpers is destroying this country. They are leading a national suicide. When will they get it? These deals behind the backs of citizens-- offering amnesty, $1 billion Mexi-Care benefits, social security checks and Dream Acts to illegals--must cease. Stop importing workers we do not need who are stealing jobs from our most vulnerable citizens and our most talented. Stop importing Third World disease-ridden aliens who are killing or harming us."



Frank of Arizona: "Your report is completely false and misleading. Immigrants are people who have been lawfully admitted to reside in the United States and they have no problem whatever in returning to Mexico anytime they wish. For the Mexican Deputy Consul General Adriana Gonzalez-Felix to state "you see some people who haven't been able to go home for years" is another downright lie. The entire article is to generate sympathy for illegal aliens, not legal immigrants. Illegal aliens can return to Mexico anytime they wish, and no one will stop them." (Former Border Patrol agent)



Barb of New Jersey: "Lou Dobbs in his CNN evening news program has some eye-opening facts about the path to national dysfunction that unrestrained immigration is leading us. At our present levels of 3 million legal & illegal immigrants a year, we lose millions of acres of agricultural land a annually and within the next 2 decades, will no longer be able to export food and supply our own nation's needs. Our present population is 292 million and will reach 420 to 470 million by 2050. In California, which produces 75% of the nation's food supply, their immigration-driven population grows by 6 million a decade and they are losing 90,000 acres of farm land every few years. The terror will be if we can't import enough food to feed ourselves as the world population grows to 10 billion and has to feed itself."



Marty in Texas: "Why should hospitals cover illegals? Illegal aliens using them as the primary caregivers are bankrupting our US hospitals. I'm tired of paying for 350,000 anchor babies each year. Citizens can no longer cover the illegals' costs plus their own. Americans across the U.S. would like to see a discussion regarding illegal immigration, the social and dollar costs, and ultimately, what it is doing to this wonderful country we live in, i.e., bankrupting hospitals, schools and states. Why don't we ask our elected officials what they plan to do about this growing unaffordable crisis? Contact Congress now at 1-800-648-3516, and call your senator's toll free at 1-877- 762-8762."



Vick of New York: "Mr. Bush, you put us between a rock and a hard place. On one hand we support your strength on international issues, and on the other hand your statements about "willing workers & willing employers" anger us. We know that is shorthand for a type of amnesty that will simply encourage more illegal immigration. On one hand is a potential for increased terrorism in our nation as we fight in Iraq. On the other hand we see the actual harm done to us by illegal immigration. We must weigh what might happen against what is already happening. My sons are in construction. One has left the field due to the complete 'colonization' of dry-wall hanging by illegal alien workers. I have a friend who had to put her kids in private school because her kids had to struggle with several different languages and weren't learning anything."



Those are a few comments from across the nation. Every American in every city could add to this horrific and growing list. Your own kids might be confused by 10 languages in their classrooms. Your spouse may have lost his or her job to an illegal alien. Your teen can't find a fast-food service job because they have been 'colonized' by illegals. Your kids may have been victims of tuberculosis spreading in Atlanta, Florida, Michigan or Colorado. You're sitting in gridlock because your city grew by one million in the last decade. This crisis list will grow bigger, more painful and deadlier as this invasion advances.



It's up to you, an American citizen, to take action. If you do nothing, it will worsen. By doing something, you can change the course of history for your country, humanity and your children. Abraham Lincoln said, "Public sentiment is everything. Without public sentiment, nothing can fail; without it nothing can succeed." In order for our country to provide benevolence for the rest of the world-whether it is food-aid, medical help or disaster relief-we must be viable. At the current accelerating rate of this crisis, our future as a nation stands in question.



Frosty Wooldridge (frostyw@juno.com), web site: (www.frostywooldridge.com) is a teacher and author who has bicycled 100,000 miles on six continents to see overpopulation up close and ugly. For more information to take action at the national level, you may go to his web site and/or www.numbersusa.com or write the author for local web sites to take local action in your state. Next book: 'INCURSION INTO AMERICA: HOW MASS ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION ADVERSELY AFFECTS AMERICAN CITIZENS AND COMMUNITIES'. If you have been affected by illegal immigration, write as much of your story as you like and submit it to the author for inclusion into the book. All names and places will remain private.

longeyes
December 30, 2003, 01:03 PM
Will Rove pay attention to Savage's poll? Rove, the Rasputin of this Administration, is the same guy who told Cong. Tom Tancredo, perhaps the staunchest opponent of unchecked illegal immigration in Congress, "never to darken the door of the White House again!" Then he told Tancredo he could expect to get frozen out fund-wise by the Republic Party and that the White House would back another candidate to oust him. This is what we are dealing with on this issue. Bush and Rove are hell-bent on globalism at all costs.

Plan on being ignored if you don't like the current policy. Savage was asked what his faithful should do, given the current political realities. Sit out the election, was his reply, and let the chips fall where they may.

MicroBalrog
December 30, 2003, 01:42 PM
The only reason that countries like Japan and Israel exist is because of the US with our vast expanses of open farmland which we use to raise animals for meat, eggs, milk, etc. as well as grow vegetables that we export to countries like Japan and probably Israel.


OK, newsflash number 1: Israel exports fruit, vegetables, and flowers.

Newsflash number 2: Most meat here is made in Israel except some made in Argentina.

moa
December 30, 2003, 02:19 PM
For starters, if you have not done so, go to www.michaelsavage.com and look at the results of the internet voting on allowing making illegal aliens legal. I am assuming the poll is legit. Something like 7 million votes have been cast and 95% are against making illegals, legal.

I will repeat what I have said here before. We presently have 2 million people in our prisons and jails. 30% of those people are foreign born, and it is a good bet most of them are illegals. We also have 4 million people on parole or probation. Of course, those serving hard time are only ones who actually got caught and convicted.

There is on our borders a 60 mile buffer zone enforced by DHS (formerly Border Patrol and Customs). After that 60 mile zone there are only 2,000 immigration agents assigned to round up and process as many as 12-13 million illegal aliens, including 300,000 missing illegals under deportation orders. With only 2,000 agents engaged, it is totally obvious that the Federal Government has no intention ever, under any immigration program, to enforce much of anything.

Something else to consider. Much of America's infra-structure is in a sad state of disrepair. Each year a report is issued grading the infra-structure, and usually nothing gets higher than a C+. This includes roads, bridges, water treatment faciliitise, sewage treatment facilities and the like. The report card gets worse each year.

The last thing America needs is more people, especially if they are poor, illiterate, low skilled, possibly diseased, possibly criminals, and cannot speak the language.

MicroBalrog
December 30, 2003, 02:44 PM
Linky! (http://www.theadvocates.org/ruwart/questions_maint.php?Category=18&id=14) :D

wingman
December 31, 2003, 12:13 AM
Even with a great influx of immigrants, therefore, we don't need to worry about `overpopulation' as long as we keep our economy free enough to provide for all.

more people=more crime=more laws=less freedom::cuss:

glocksman
December 31, 2003, 06:20 AM
What this is about isn't immigration per se, it's about enlarging the labor pool in order to allow corporations to hold wages down on the jobs that they can't export to Mexico or China.

Bush's pandering on this issue has nothing to do with the 'hispanic voting bloc' and everything to do with ensuring a supply of cheap labor for his contributors.



Deport them. Now. :fire:

MicroBalrog
December 31, 2003, 03:22 PM
We propose a five-word constitutional amendment: There shall be open borders. People are the great resource, and so long as we keep our economy free, more people means more growth, the more the merrier. Study after study shows that even the most recent immigrants give more than they take.


-The Wall Street Journal

seeker_two
December 31, 2003, 03:30 PM
MicroBalrog: That policy is certainly working well for the Israeli & Palestinian population...:rolleyes:

MicroBalrog
December 31, 2003, 03:32 PM
MicroBalrog: That policy is certainly working well for the Israeli & Palestinian population

I didn't notice we were getting any in. We use stuff like 20mm Vulcans on illegal immigrants. NOT kidding.

Now, if you like that, how would you like our gun policy?

glocksman
December 31, 2003, 04:51 PM
I didn't notice we were getting any in. We use stuff like 20mm Vulcans on illegal immigrants. NOT kidding

My plan is called the Million Mines per Mile™ plan.
It may not be as spectacular in action as a Vulcan, but its just as effective. :D

We propose a five-word constitutional amendment: There shall be open borders. People are the great resource, and so long as we keep our economy free, more people means more growth, the more the merrier. Study after study shows that even the most recent immigrants give more than they take.

Sure they give more than they take. :rolleyes:
Would you like to buy a cement bicycle to go along with those 'studies'?

The only reason the WSJ supports an amnesty and open borders is because it supresses wages.

Here's (http://www.fairus.org/ImmigrationIssueCenters/ImmigrationIssueCentersList.cfm?c=13) some more information on illegal immigration.

Despite being ineligible, illegal aliens get welfare the same way they get jobs: false identity document fraud. In many cities, false documents can be bought on the street for as little as $40. With false identity as a U.S. citizen, an illegal alien may establish eligibility for welfare. With the cost of displacing American workers, the cost of giving welfare to needy illegal aliens, and the cost of providing them general services, it is estimated that the annual net cost of illegal immigrants is $20 billion (after counting their tax contributions).

longeyes
December 31, 2003, 05:11 PM
"We propose a five-word constitutional amendment: There shall be open borders. People are the great resource, and so long as we keep our economy free, more people means more growth, the more the merrier. Study after study shows that even the most recent immigrants give more than they take.


-The Wall Street Journal"


The welfare state isn't going away; in fact, with the help of our current President and many of his partisans it is, in fact, increasing.

The notion that people, per se, are the great resource is bogus. There are many populous nations that would belie that assertion. Creative people, operating within an effective social and cultural political system, are the engine of economic progress. America's economic edge results from a combination of entrepreneurial spirit hitched to a strong scientific and technological base. The Left in this country is eroding the former; our soft, consumeristic life style is imperiling the latter.

I agree with many of the WSJ's positions but here they are spouting the accepted globalist line.

Waitone
December 31, 2003, 05:16 PM
A country, any country is defined by its borders.

No borders, no countries.

Any country that does not contol its borders ceases to exist as a country.

Maybe we need to redefine countries in terms of corporations. So instead of being a citizen of the US, I'd be a citizen of General Electric.

MicroBalrog
December 31, 2003, 06:38 PM
Does anybody know what the basis for the original quota idea was and who it was aimed at?

longeyes
December 31, 2003, 06:44 PM
If you're talking about Ted Kennedy's initiative ('65?), it would appear the intention was to de-europeanize the United States. Some would term that "fairness," others racism in reverse.

MicroBalrog
December 31, 2003, 07:17 PM
No, I mean the original one in the early 20th century, designed to keep the Jews out IIRC.

seeker_two
December 31, 2003, 11:30 PM
I didn't notice we were getting any in. We use stuff like 20mm Vulcans on illegal immigrants. NOT kidding.

Now, if you like that, how would you like our gun policy?

I like the Vulcan idea, but I believe the Million Mines per Mile™ plan would work better. (BTW, I was commenting on the irony of your prior quote...;) )

As for immigration: I would like to see our legal immigration limits TRIPLE--as long as we stamp out the illegal alien problem. And I'd like to see ruthless means used to stamp out the illegal alien problem. Such as a no-man's land five miles inside the Mexican border complete w/ land mines & rocket-firing arial drones. Would help to "dissuade" illegals...:evil:

STONER
January 1, 2004, 12:20 AM
If the United States continues on its present course, it will go the way of the Roman Empire. :fire:

MicroBalrog
January 1, 2004, 01:33 AM
I would like to see our legal immigration limits TRIPLE--as long as we stamp out the illegal alien problem.

That problem is at least partially a result of the way you people made it so hard for immigrants to get in legally

longeyes
January 1, 2004, 03:25 PM
"You people?"

Hey, dude, show me another country so welcoming and so generous.

We're all waiting...

The future of America is going to be about allegiance. If this country breaks up because of the balkanization imposed by our misguided Left, you can expect we will be making up the lost territory elsewhere.

longeyes
January 1, 2004, 03:30 PM
America is not a crashpad for everybody in the world who thinks they have a God-given right to come here. Some of us remember that, even if the tasseled loafer set in the State Department doesn't.

STONER
January 4, 2004, 11:59 AM
quote
____________________________________________________________

" If this country breaks up because of the balkanization "
____________________________________________________________

longeyes,

Balkanizing the country does seem to be the goal. Some will argue that the purpose is for Votes, or Cheap Labor, or Compassion, etc. OK, regardless of the Real Purpose, the result IS The BALKANIZATION OF THE U.S.A.

Our policy(s) should be to preserve our BORDERS, LANGUAGE, and CULTURE.

The ONLY way to reverse course is to VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS.

Forget party loyalties, think only of America First, and what is right.

MicroBalrog
January 5, 2004, 11:49 AM
Welcoming? Generous?

Israel.

moa
January 5, 2004, 01:39 PM
IIRC, the United States allows more legal immigration than all of the rest of the world put together. Today, one out of five Americans is foreign born. All of that sounds quite "welcoming" and "generous" to me.

However, I think our legal immigration quotas are too large. The secret to an effective immigration policy is that the flow of people allows for assimilation. Between legal and illegal immigration, I do not see assimilation happening.

Regarding Israel, is not one of the big sticking points of a lasting Israeli and Palestinian peace agreement is the "right of return" of the estimated four million Palestinians of the Palestinian diaspora?

It appears to me that Israel has no intention of allowing all those Palestinians to come back.

MicroBalrog
January 5, 2004, 02:07 PM
It appears to me that Israel has no intention of allowing all those Palestinians to come back.

In actual fact, Ehud Barak did propose an agreement on how to do that.

P.S. Up until 1989 EVERY new citizen got appartment keys when he landed.

Today, over half Israelis are either immigrants or sons of immigrants - including the Prime Minister.

moa
January 5, 2004, 03:42 PM
Everybody in the USA is an immigrant or the offspring of immigrants, and that includes American Indians. Does that mean that the USA should have open borders and let in just anybody and everybody? I don't think so. And, I doubt if Israel does not control immigration.

One of the complaints I have heard uttered by Iraelis and their American supporters is that the reason there are so many "Palestinians" in Israel, is they are actually people from other parts of the Middle East, mostly Jordan, who immigrated to Palestine before it became Israel, because the Israelis had turned the desert into a garden.

Barak is not longer Prime Minister either. Maybe his proposal did not go over too well with Israeli voters.

MicroBalrog
January 5, 2004, 03:46 PM
One of the complaints I have heard uttered by Iraelis and their American supporters is that the reason there are so many "Palestinians" in Israel,

You can't have "Palestinians" in Israel by definition.

Palestinian = West Bank

Israeli-Arab = Green Line

If you enjoyed reading about "Compassion run amok - Bush's immigration policy" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!