Ann hits the nail on the head about amnesty

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, if you listen to the left enough, and the media, though they're one in the same, you would think this is a rotten place to live. You would think also, that no one in the world likes us so why in the world would anyone want to come here to live? I mean, this place sucks and we piss everyone off so who would want to live with us? Look at all the people leaving too. I don't know how we're going to make it with the mass exodus we're experiencing because of the crappy country, laws and policies we have here and abroad. Aren't the illegals that are flooding the country just filling a void left by those escaping?
 
I have a problem with Amnesty. I do not have a problem with legal
immigration.

My great grandfather legally immigrated from Poland. In fact the only picture of him is a blowup from his Ellis Island photo.
My grandmother legally immigrated from Australia.
The key word is legally, as in abiding by the laws of the country they so desperately wanted to live in.

"Amnesty" awards criminals in this case. Every illegal in the US is a criminal. Why should we reward them? Because they broke our laws?
If this is passed maybe BATFE will have an amnesty period for machine guns so every one can buy one. Nah, we're law abiding citizens, the government can't reward us.:cuss:
 
The Libertarians dislike the police-state tactics that would be necessary to enforce a crackdown. Coulter makes light of this by suggesting that whoever's counting them or canvassing schools/hospitals should be in charge of deporting them, but we all know it's not that simple. Any enforcement will require door-to-door searches, assumption of guilt until proven innocence, and chucking the 4th amendment out the window.[quote/]
That is partly the point. Even if we make the illegal law tougher, all we need is moderate domestic enforcement. We don't need to violate rights, just make sure we are working at it and the threat of being caught and deported is real.
 
That is partly the point. Even if we make the illegal law tougher, all we need is moderate domestic enforcement. We don't need to violate rights, just make sure we are working at it and the threat of being caught and deported is real.
Agreed. Unfortunately, you seem to be the only one advocating that.
 
And that picture above is a pretty horrible photoshop IMO.

How about this picture? It definitley isn't photoshop as it is from her own web site.

ann-coulter-rifle.jpg
 
That is partly the point. Even if we make the illegal law tougher, all we need is moderate domestic enforcement. We don't need to violate rights, just make sure we are working at it and the threat of being caught and deported is real.

If we would do that, I'd be happy. Can't show a green card, back you go, period. Hire em' or harbor them, you get slapped with a stiff fine and or jail time. As it is, the benefits outweigh the risk. That has to change. The benefits have to go away and the risk has to go up!
 
An interesting take on the Amnesty bill in the Senate. Heard this on the Limbaugh show.

His belief is that the reason both Dems and Repubs are for this bill is because of the looming SocSec/Medicare crisis. Lots of boomers are gonna retire in the next several years, and the tax burden on Gen-X, Gen-Y, et al is going to become oppressive in order for the Gov. to pay out the entitlements expected by boomers. So much so, he believes, that us Gen-Xers and Gen-Yers will say "to hell with it, we quit". The bastards in DC are deathly afraid of this

Limbaugh's right, and the crooks in Dc should be deathly afraid. As a Gen-Xer, if my taxes go up so high that I can't even afford to take the kids to MickeyD's, I'm gonna quit my job and drop out of the work force. The geezers and the pols can go find another corpse to feed off of.
 
I think most of the Liberals who hate Ann Coulter are gays guys who wish they were good-looking blond chicks. Ann is right, Right, and righteous. Or she may be a chain-smoking lesbian. I don't care. I'd still have all her babies.


As for immigration, America is being hollowed out by the rich people. Those of us who work for a living have had a pretty good gig here, but it's over. Bienvenidos a Mexico.
 
-Budney

Ironic. :p
Guilty! Well-turned sarcasm is a literary feast. I admit to enjoying AC books, except that they make me hyperventilate after a while and I have to put it down for a bit. The sarcasm is so concentrated it can accidentally melt a hole in the back of your head.

--Len.
 
Alot of Ann's sarcasm goes over alot of people's head. I notice that people like Bill O'Reilly get mad when Ann says controversial things,but he gives people like Rush a pass, I think he has a problem with intelligent women like Ann speaking thier mind.
 
Originally posted by Marshall:
If we would do that, I'd be happy. Can't show a green card, back you go, period. Hire em' or harbor them, you get slapped with a stiff fine and or jail time. As it is, the benefits outweigh the risk. That has to change. The benefits have to go away and the risk has to go up!

And where do they go if they are American citizens who do not have a greencard?

How do you decide on who to as for a greencard? If you do that with everyone and demand proof of citizenship your violating their 4th Amendment rights?

Do you have a greencard?
 
If you're Mexican, you had better have ID. It's not mine to decide how they're asked or when. You're asked to show a drivers license for merely driving a car and by GOD you better have it to show. It's the illegal law breakers coming across the border that would cause their fellow Mexicans the inconvenience. If that puts them in a position of having to show a "citizenship liscense", or something, so what? If they don't like it, they can start telling them to get the hell out of here and quit inviting more of them over. Congress can iron out the details, that's what their paid to do.

And by the way, yes, I think we should profile Arabs too. I'm sick of their whiny Eemom azz crap as well.

What about their rights, what about their rights? Those two groups have provided this country and it's people more trouble, problems, money loss and caused more infringement on rights than anything I or this Government has done, period. If Islamic Jihadists weren't killing us and we didn't have millions of illegals Mexicans coming into this country draining us dry, we wouldn't be having this discussion. If you were as sick of it as I am, we might be better off. But we have these people that sit back and think that illegal alien law breakers should have rights in this country and them bitch about our rights being infringed upon to try to solve the problem. Frickin idiotic. A little common sense would go a long way.

You won't like whatever answer I give and furthermore, look into my eye.... (0).... and tell me if you see me giving a rats butt.
 
If you do that with everyone and demand proof of citizenship your violating their 4th Amendment rights?

What fourth amendment right would that be, Tecumseh?
 
The Libertarians dislike the police-state tactics that would be necessary to enforce a crackdown. Coulter makes light of this by suggesting that whoever's counting them or canvassing schools/hospitals should be in charge of deporting them, but we all know it's not that simple. Any enforcement will require door-to-door searches, assumption of guilt until proven innocence, and chucking the 4th amendment out the window.
I don't understand why any of that would be necessary.

Simply stop allowing the employment of people who don't have a valid work visa or green card, stop dishing out public benefits to those who don't have a vaid visa or green card, and require any public agency that becomes aware of persons without visas or green cards to report them.

End of problem.

As it stands, the deck is stacked heavily in favor of the illegals. The Department of Homeland Defense tells the states and cities not to "meddle" in immigration enforcement, and some cities themseslves tell their police departments (comprised, remember, of officers who have sworn an oath to uphold and to enforce the law) NOT to arrest or detain illegal alients.

Phooey. We don't need to deport 12 million of them. If we shut of the supply of "undocumented" jobs, free social bennies to which they are not entitled, and track down and deport maybe a few hundred thousand of them -- most of the others would be tripping over their own feet in the rush to get out before they get caught.
 
Marshall: So we should do the same with Chinese, Irish, Cuban, African American, Russian, East European, and people of other races? I mean if it is to stop illegals?

I bet that if I looked into your eye I would see a man consumed by hatred for Mexicans and Arabs. Got any statistics to support your claim about millions of illegals draining us dry? I mean how many illegals leech off the welfare system or other social services?

The right to unreasonable search and seizure. To stop someone and demand to inspect their greencard is pretty unconstitutional? Could you not argue that demanding they provide proof of their innocence is unconstitutional? I think the government should have to provide the proof.

But hey when were talking about rounding up brown people, its ok.
 
Marshall: So we should do the same with Chinese, Irish, Cuban, African American, Russian, East European, and people of other races? I mean if it is to stop illegals?

Geeze, we deal with the problem at hand and currently it's a flood of illegal Mexicans. If we catch others here illegally, we deport them too. Like I said, common sense.

I bet that if I looked into your eye I would see a man consumed by hatred for Mexicans and Arabs.

You'll never look into my eye, you couldn't There's no such hatred for any group of people. Those that try to kill us and those that cause an infringement upon our rights in order to solve a problem they are causing by intentionally breaking the law do not make me happy though, at all.

Do I have a Link to show what they cost us? Yep. Here's one from 2002 and it's even 4 years old. How about a net defict of $10,000,000,000. That's Ten Billion if you have trouble with zeros. That's just for 2002, one year. I would hate to see the cost today. So much so I'm not even going to search for it. This doesn't even take into account the crime rate as it relates to the destruction of peoples property, etc. Doesn't account for lives taken by illegal gang members either. There's no price on that.

http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html
cisheader.gif

The High Cost of Cheap Labor
Illegal Immigration and the Federal Budget

Executive Summary


This study is one of the first to estimate the total impact of illegal immigration on the federal budget. Most previous studies have focused on the state and local level and have examined only costs or tax payments, but not both. Based on Census Bureau data, this study finds that, when all taxes paid (direct and indirect) and all costs are considered, illegal households created a net fiscal deficit at the federal level of more than $10 billion in 2002. We also estimate that, if there was an amnesty for illegal aliens, the net fiscal deficit would grow to nearly $29 billion.

Among the findings:

*

Households headed by illegal aliens imposed more than $26.3 billion in costs on the federal government in 2002 and paid only $16 billion in taxes, creating a net fiscal deficit of almost $10.4 billion, or $2,700 per illegal household.

*

Among the largest costs are Medicaid ($2.5 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches ($1.9 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion).

*

With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services.

*

On average, the costs that illegal households impose on federal coffers are less than half that of other households, but their tax payments are only one-fourth that of other households.

*

Many of the costs associated with illegals are due to their American-born children, who are awarded U.S. citizenship at birth. Thus, greater efforts at barring illegals from federal programs will not reduce costs because their citizen children can continue to access them.

*

If illegal aliens were given amnesty and began to pay taxes and use services like households headed by legal immigrants with the same education levels, the estimated annual net fiscal deficit would increase from $2,700 per household to nearly $7,700, for a total net cost of $29 billion.

*

Costs increase dramatically because unskilled immigrants with legal status -- what most illegal aliens would become -- can access government programs, but still tend to make very modest tax payments.

*

Although legalization would increase average tax payments by 77 percent, average costs would rise by 118 percent.

*

The fact that legal immigrants with few years of schooling are a large fiscal drain does not mean that legal immigrants overall are a net drain -- many legal immigrants are highly skilled.

*

The vast majority of illegals hold jobs. Thus the fiscal deficit they create for the federal government is not the result of an unwillingness to work.

*

The results of this study are consistent with a 1997 study by the National Research Council, which also found that immigrants' education level is a key determinant of their fiscal impact.


The right to unreasonable search and seizure. To stop someone and demand to inspect their greencard is pretty unconstitutional?

First of all, what's the purpose of a green card if you're not suppose to be asked for it? "Hey, just haul azz to America, it doesn't matter if you break the law getting there, once you're there, they can't ask you sh*t. You got it made bro!" You're stopped for a drivers license. What's the difference? Hell, I show more ID writing a check or renting a car than this would entail. You give more info than that buying a gun. I guess this would just be too distressful? And because you don't want that to happen for selfish reasons, we have to put up with all the Bullsnot this is costing us and the trouble and burden it is to our nation, our people and our workforce. You're not interested in what's best for this country.

But hey when were talking about rounding up brown people, its ok.

Typical predictive race card response. Just shows you're more interested in not inconveniencing a brown person than you are at what's best for this nation. I don't give a crap about their color, if they were polka dotted I would feel the same.
 
First of all, what's the purpose of a green card if you're not suppose to be asked for it?
What's the point of carrying identification, if police can't ask for it at any time?

I support legal immigration, but oppose the illegal kind. Nevertheless, to catch and deport an illegal, due process must be followed. Our Constitutional rights must be observed at all times, or else they mean nothing.

After all, what's to stop a cop from deciding that YOU look like an illegal alien from Canada, and demanding YOUR papers?

--Len.
 
I support legal immigration, but oppose the illegal kind. Nevertheless, to catch and deport an illegal, due process must be followed. Our Constitutional rights must be observed at all times, or else they mean nothing.

I agree but if the police WERE allowed to detain those suspected of being illegal when they say were pulled over for speeding, and have NO ID etc. Or when they are arrested for PD and have NO ID, or well I have personally read of dozens of local encouters that would certainly qualify but the LEOs are not supposed to be involved in detaining the illegals. That is the feds job and we all know how great a job they do!:rolleyes:

BTW wasn't the HSD supposed to help get all of the different LE agencies to work together to make us safer? How about a little coordination/cooperation?
 
After all, what's to stop a cop from deciding that YOU look like an illegal alien from Canada, and demanding YOUR papers?

When we have a 12 million illegal Canadians crossing our borders to live hear I'll be happy to show my ID anytime asked. As a legal American willing to solve problems to make our nation better, I would be happy to do so. Some of us will put what best for our country first, above ourselves. But you have no respect for this country Budney, you've evidenced that in your posts collectively, and they outweigh your "yes I do" by a long shot.
 
Marshall: Your the one advocating throwing our rights out the window and you say Budney has no respect for America? Last I thought the founding fathers looked down on the idea of carrying papers to be produced at a moments notice for an agent of the state.

I look Mexican but I am a United States Citizen. Would you have me stopped and asked for proof of citizenship based on my appearance? I would not ask for your rights to be violated just because I look like someone else.
 
When we have a 12 million illegal Canadians crossing our borders to live hear I'll be happy to show my ID anytime asked.
The problem with that answer is that we have millions and millions of US citizens of Hispanic persuasion. By your argument, all hispanics should be happy to do without their constitutional right of due process because they have similar appearance to someone who might be a lawbreaker.

Due process is applied to everyone equally within our jurisdiction, or it becomes meaningless. You can't just deny due process to "criminals," because you don't know who the criminals are until it's proven--so if you strip away due process, you're guaranteed to deprive the innocent of their rights.

Tecumseh,

I look Mexican but I am a United States Citizen.
Sorry that I left out people who aren't even hispanic, but who look it. For that matter, I look Jewish. "May ve zee your paperz, please? Vhat kind ov name is 'Budney'?" :evil:

--Len.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top