citizenship.... [Archive] - Debate Policy

PostmodernProphet

01-30-2013, 11:18 AM

Question #1
Do you object to the fact that people who are here legally can become citizens by meeting statutory criteria?.....if so, why?

Question #2
Do you object if people who have been or are here illegally take action that would result in their being here legally?......if so, why?

ConHog

01-30-2013, 11:57 AM

Question #1
Do you object to the fact that people who are here legally can become citizens by meeting statutory criteria?.....if so, why?

no because that is the very foundation of who we are as a nation. Immigrants who came together to forge a new life.

Question #2
Do you object if people who have been or are here illegally take action that would result in their being here legally?......if so, why?

No because our government has allowed it for so long that the only realistic option at this point is to give them legal status.

Actually, the more I think about it, there isn't even need to close the border. Just open them for legal immigration and change the laws to make it a criminal offense to be here without legal status. Meaning you can to the US through Mexico all day long, as long as you cross at a checkpoint and fill out the appropriate paperwork and of course go through screening. If you come in any other way and get caught you go to prison. End of story.

That would make it much easier to weed out the people who are just looking to be good citizens of their adopted homeland from troublemakers and allow law enforcement to concentrate on the real problem.

tailfins

01-30-2013, 11:58 AM

Question #1
Do you object to the fact that people who are here legally can become citizens by meeting statutory criteria?.....if so, why?

Question #2
Do you object if people who have been or are here illegally take action that would result in their being here legally?......if so, why?

1) It depends on the criteria. Never should there be an opening to import voters for an ideological purpose. I'm not interested in becoming a colony of Hugo Chavez or Andrés Manuel López Obrador.

2) If it doesn't provide a path to citizenship and requires a periodic return to their home country.

gabosaurus

01-30-2013, 12:04 PM

Back when immigration reform was previously debated, two issues were paramount to many Americans: that the immigrants learn and understand English, and that they pass a background check. Both of those are in the current immigration reform bill.

Now I have a question: Are you willing to accept a tax increase that would provide better border security?

ConHog

01-30-2013, 12:06 PM

Back when immigration reform was previously debated, two issues were paramount to many Americans: that the immigrants learn and understand English, and that they pass a background check. Both of those are in the current immigration reform bill.

Now I have a question: Are you willing to accept a tax increase that would provide better border security?

Nope it's unneeded, as illustrated in my earlier post.

Trigg

01-30-2013, 01:03 PM

Question 1. Legal immigration is good for this country

Question 2. People who wish to become legal.

1.Need to learn English
2.Have a means of supporting themselves so they don't end up a burden on the tax payers. In fact since most are uneducated, I wouldn't mind seeing a time limit on when they could apply for benefits in the future.
3. Are not able to sponser family members to come to the US unless they to can support themselves and they speak English.

This of course is a moot point since securing the border is a first priority to any changes. A recent report came out that the border patrol misses 1/2 of the people sneaking in so they caught 340,000 people last year so that same number waltzed right past and into the US no problem.

I don't want to see a blanted amnesty with the promis of border security later. The last time we gave amnesty to 3 million, this time 11 million, in 30yrs 40 million.

We need to fine employers and mandate e-verify.

aboutime

01-30-2013, 03:32 PM

This works every time...4414 4415

ConHog

01-30-2013, 03:42 PM

Question 1. Legal immigration is good for this country

Question 2. People who wish to become legal.

1.Need to learn English
2.Have a means of supporting themselves so they don't end up a burden on the tax payers. In fact since most are uneducated, I wouldn't mind seeing a time limit on when they could apply for benefits in the future.
3. Are not able to sponser family members to come to the US unless they to can support themselves and they speak English.

This of course is a moot point since securing the border is a first priority to any changes. A recent report came out that the border patrol misses 1/2 of the people sneaking in so they caught 340,000 people last year so that same number waltzed right past and into the US no problem.

I don't want to see a blanted amnesty with the promis of border security later. The last time we gave amnesty to 3 million, this time 11 million, in 30yrs 40 million.

We need to fine employers and mandate e-verify.

absolutely we do, also implement Real ID in ALL states. Its been pushed off since 2007. Time to move on it.

Kathianne

01-30-2013, 05:13 PM

absolutely we do, also implement Real ID in ALL states. Its been pushed off since 2007. Time to move on it.

Such as a National ID? No thanks!

http://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/5-problems-national-id-cards

http://epic.org/privacy/id_cards/

fj1200

01-30-2013, 05:41 PM

Such as a National ID? No thanks!

http://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/5-problems-national-id-cards

http://epic.org/privacy/id_cards/

I don't think it's a national ID, I think it's just national standards.

avatar4321

01-30-2013, 06:34 PM

Question #1
Do you object to the fact that people who are here legally can become citizens by meeting statutory criteria?.....if so, why?

Question #2
Do you object if people who have been or are here illegally take action that would result in their being here legally?......if so, why?

1) No. No problem whatsoever.
2) Not per se. However, I think if we are going to allow opportunities like that, we need to seal the border first. It doesn't make sense to allow people to enter the country illegally, make themselves legal, and then allow them to sap our governments resources through entitlement programs, etc. Ideally, Id like to see the entitlement programs be reduced. But if we allow illegals to become legal with the current entitlement programs, we are pretty much incentivizing more people to enter illegally. We need to fix the borders and the improve legal immigration methods. And that is true regardless of nationality, race, or ethnicity of the people entering illegally.

aboutime

01-30-2013, 06:39 PM

Such as a National ID? No thanks!

http://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/5-problems-national-id-cards

http://epic.org/privacy/id_cards/

Kathianne. Anyone who fears a National Database of Americans is BEHIND THE TIMES.
We already have such a database for every newborn baby, and American who has a SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER.

Not to mention BIRTH CERTIFICATES, Driver's licenses, Banking ID's, Welfare, and Food Stamp Contracts.

The cries about NO NATIONAL ID are phony. If people pay attention.

Kathianne

01-30-2013, 06:53 PM

Kathianne. Anyone who fears a National Database of Americans is BEHIND THE TIMES.
We already have such a database for every newborn baby, and American who has a SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER.

Not to mention BIRTH CERTIFICATES, Driver's licenses, Banking ID's, Welfare, and Food Stamp Contracts.

The cries about NO NATIONAL ID are phony. If people pay attention.

I disagree. There are ties that are prohibited by SSN, not going to happen with a national ID. Hell, for years they've tried to turn SSN into such, SCOTUS has not allowed.

cadet

01-30-2013, 06:59 PM

Question #1
Do you object to the fact that people who are here legally can become citizens by meeting statutory criteria?.....if so, why?

Now who in their right mind would be against LEGALLY coming over? The whole damn countries based off of immigration. We're a melting pot of every nation!

Question #2
Do you object if people who have been or are here illegally take action that would result in their being here legally?......if so, why?

My cousin (Mexican dude) has called in to deport a lot of his other Mexican cousins. I wouldn't have an issue with it, if it didn't hurt the hospitals, businesses, insurance companies, and all in all jacked up the price of everything.

ConHog

01-30-2013, 07:05 PM

Such as a National ID? No thanks!

http://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/5-problems-national-id-cards

http://epic.org/privacy/id_cards/

Its just national standards for state ids

Kathianne

01-30-2013, 07:17 PM

Question #1
Do you object to the fact that people who are here legally can become citizens by meeting statutory criteria?.....if so, why?

Of course not. Many of us had folks that came over from 'the old country' before there were laws, other than being 'healthy.' Most of those dreamed of citizenship. Indeed my paternal grandfather got off Ellis Island, to board a boat to Cuba for that war. His enlistment ended with him being a 'fireman' in the Navy, citizenship, and a postal service job. He died when my dad, the last of 5 children was 3. He was the postmaster in the town I grew up in.

Immigrants have been the lifeblood of the country. They are more likely to start new businesses and become successful than 3rd generation Americans.

Question #2
Do you object if people who have been or are here illegally take action that would result in their being here legally?......if so, why?

I don't object to 'those people' doing what they can to secure their place in this country. I will blame any lawmakers that create a 'new path' towards amnesty, without closing the borders to illegals. We need to reform our immigration laws. Up the numbers from countries with demand. Eastern Europe comes readily to mind.

I've seen lots about how 'only those with skills necessary' should be allowed in. I disagree with this line of thinking, wholeheartedly. Yes, there should be those types of visas. We should also be open to those who want to come here to 'breathe free' and add an exclamation point to the message of Declaration. There are untold millions that came with nothing, including scant education, that made their family fortune. We need that refreshing spirit, now as in the past. They take chances that others wouldn't. They work harder than those here generations.

ConHog

01-30-2013, 07:38 PM

I disagree. There are ties that are prohibited by SSN, not going to happen with a national ID. Hell, for years they've tried to turn SSN into such, SCOTUS has not allowed.

Im on my phone and cant link but you should really google the real id act. It would solve so many issues and has nothing to do with a national id.

Kathianne

01-30-2013, 07:40 PM

Im on my phone and cant link but you should really google the real id act. It would solve so many issues and has nothing to do with a national id.

I'd take that under advisement, other than my two links in that reply. Besides, I'm on your ignore list.

PostmodernProphet

01-31-2013, 08:44 AM

2) If it doesn't provide a path to citizenship

why would you object to them being eligible for citizenship if they are now legal?......

fj1200

01-31-2013, 08:54 AM

Question #1
Do you object to the fact that people who are here legally can become citizens by meeting statutory criteria?.....if so, why?

Question #2
Do you object if people who have been or are here illegally take action that would result in their being here legally?......if so, why?

No and no. I don't blame anyone who wants to get away from a country that is less hospitable than our own. It's also not their fault that our Federal government has completely abdicated its responsibility in managing our borders.

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot

01-31-2013, 10:40 AM

No and no. I don't blame anyone who wants to get away from a country that is less hospitable than our own. It's also not their fault that our Federal government has completely abdicated its responsibility in managing our borders.

That does not justify their breaking our laws by illegal entry. We have laws to protect our nation , our culture and our freedoms. This massive illegal immigration(that is engineered) is allowed as an attack upon ALL of that. -Tyr

fj1200

01-31-2013, 10:42 AM

That does not justify their breaking our laws by illegal entry. We have laws to protect our nation , our culture and our freedoms. This massive illegal immigration(that is engineered) is allowed as an attack upon ALL of that. -Tyr

I didn't blame the East Germans from escaping either.

aboutime

01-31-2013, 03:35 PM

That does not justify their breaking our laws by illegal entry. We have laws to protect our nation , our culture and our freedoms. This massive illegal immigration(that is engineered) is allowed as an attack upon ALL of that. -Tyr

Tyr. When the U.S. Government. Namely the Obama administration, and his Legal representative as A.G. Holder systematically, and freely disobey, neglect, and ignore the very laws they take an Oath to defend.

This is what the people who voted for Obama asked for.

Little do those people...Obama-ites realize, or understand how their Unquestionable, Total Support for Obama has created more problems for them in loss of jobs, and openings that All Americans dream of in that Mysterious American Dream.
But, once again. Obama, Holder, and the Democrats in Congress are intentionally preventing, limiting, and fooling the Minorities in our society from getting an education, or becoming more knowledgeable about THEM.
As long as politicians succeed in preventing Americans from LEARNING the TRUTH...STUPIDITY, IGNORANCE, and BEING DUMB..will always win.

Kathianne

01-31-2013, 03:40 PM

I didn't blame the East Germans from escaping either.

That's very true. However, West Germany had a policy of not punishing, indeed welcoming the escapees, as it should have been. While US isn's 'welcoming' they have not done the massive sweeps of certain industries that they are aware of hiring illegals.

Reform would not only try to tighten illegal crossings, which are not at the entry points obviously, but also put severe penalties, including jail time for repeat offending owners and/or management.

As I've stated, I'm fine with a 'way to legality' for those already here, that other than 'entry' have been law abiding. I'm not in favor of 'touch back,' that only builds in reasons to stay 'illegal.' Those though who've stolen identities and such? No, those folks need to be sent back and not allowed to return. Not just violent criminals, white collar too.

fj1200

01-31-2013, 04:04 PM

That's very true. However, West Germany had a policy of not punishing, indeed welcoming the escapees, as it should have been. While US isn's 'welcoming' they have not done the massive sweeps of certain industries that they are aware of hiring illegals.

Reform would not only try to tighten illegal crossings, which are not at the entry points obviously, but also put severe penalties, including jail time for repeat offending owners and/or management.

As I've stated, I'm fine with a 'way to legality' for those already here, that other than 'entry' have been law abiding. I'm not in favor of 'touch back,' that only builds in reasons to stay 'illegal.' Those though who've stolen identities and such? No, those folks need to be sent back and not allowed to return. Not just violent criminals, white collar too.

Sure and they have been 'welcomed' by our not securing our own border. To constantly complain about those illegals that broke our laws is counterproductive IMO. That's why Republicans need to come up with a better plan rather than to just accept some sort of brokered deal; the impetus has been completely on the amnesty side and the lack of a better plan will only eventually lead to that outcome.

bingster

01-31-2013, 04:08 PM

Kathianne. Anyone who fears a National Database of Americans is BEHIND THE TIMES.
We already have such a database for every newborn baby, and American who has a SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER.

Not to mention BIRTH CERTIFICATES, Driver's licenses, Banking ID's, Welfare, and Food Stamp Contracts.

The cries about NO NATIONAL ID are phony. If people pay attention.

Yea, we wouldn't want a national registry of gun owners, for instance.... :)

Kathianne

01-31-2013, 04:09 PM

Sure and they have been 'welcomed' by our not securing our own border. To constantly complain about those illegals that broke our laws is counterproductive IMO. That's why Republicans need to come up with a better plan rather than to just accept some sort of brokered deal; the impetus has been completely on the amnesty side and the lack of a better plan will only eventually lead to that outcome.

I agree, I think I said as much. The border will never be 'fool proof,' however by patrolling more and enforcing more, it would help. The best deterrent though is making it economically bad to come here illegally, that takes punishing those that hire illegals, whether businesses or private citizens for house care, lawn care, child care, etc. The punishments need to be advertised and enforced.

fj1200

01-31-2013, 04:12 PM

I agree, I think I said as much. The border will never be 'fool proof,' however by patrolling more and enforcing more, it would help. The best deterrent though is making it economically bad to come here illegally, that takes punishing those that hire illegals, whether businesses or private citizens for house care, lawn care, child care, etc. The punishments need to be advertised and enforced.

That's the stick approach. I prefer a bit of a carrot that allows many to stay while being registered, and tracked, by the government when they have gainful employment. If businesses, big ones primarily, then try and skirt the rules then bring out the stick.

Kathianne

01-31-2013, 04:21 PM

That's the stick approach. I prefer a bit of a carrot that allows many to stay while being registered, and tracked, by the government when they have gainful employment. If businesses, big ones primarily, then try and skirt the rules then bring out the stick.

We're saying the same thing. If they are already here, get on to the 'gain legal status,' OR face the repercussions of enforcement of reforms. Can't get to one without the other.

bingster

01-31-2013, 04:25 PM

I agree, I think I said as much. The border will never be 'fool proof,' however by patrolling more and enforcing more, it would help. The best deterrent though is making it economically bad to come here illegally, that takes punishing those that hire illegals, whether businesses or private citizens for house care, lawn care, child care, etc. The punishments need to be advertised and enforced.

I'm not used to this, but I can't agree with you more. While some are worried we'll lean more towards the amnesty side, I am very concerned that we'll lean to hard on the "secure border" side. We can not hermetically seal our border. I have to agree and re-state an earlier question by ConHog, are we willing to increase our taxes to pay for the added costs of "securing" our border?

Last year, according (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/08/us/huge-amounts-spent-on-immigration-study-finds.html?ref=us&_r=0) to the nonpartisan Migration Research Institute, the Obama administration spent more than $18 billion on border security and immigration enforcement. That’s more than was spent on all other federal law enforcement agencies combined. And a 2011 report (http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/report/2011/08/04/10180/safer-than-ever/) from the Government Accounting Office found that 81 percent of the border with Mexico met one of the top three levels of operational control and security, as defined by the Department of Homeland Security.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/01/29/we-dont-have-a-border-security-problem/

red states rule

01-31-2013, 04:43 PM

I'm not used to this, but I can't agree with you more. While some are worried we'll lean more towards the amnesty side, I am very concerned that we'll lean to hard on the "secure border" side. We can not hermetically seal our border. I have to agree and re-state an earlier question by ConHog, are we willing to increase our taxes to pay for the added costs of "securing" our border?

Last year, according (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/08/us/huge-amounts-spent-on-immigration-study-finds.html?ref=us&_r=0) to the nonpartisan Migration Research Institute, the Obama administration spent more than $18 billion on border security and immigration enforcement. That’s more than was spent on all other federal law enforcement agencies combined. And a 2011 report (http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/report/2011/08/04/10180/safer-than-ever/) from the Government Accounting Office found that 81 percent of the border with Mexico met one of the top three levels of operational control and security, as defined by the Department of Homeland Security.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/01/29/we-dont-have-a-border-security-problem/

Bing I am not seeing Obama or Dems talking about border security or enforcement. What all this "reform" is about is getting illegals to vote and expand the Dems base

I will give you Dems credit since you always create in 25 and 30 year plans to expand your grip on government

With Motor Voter you made it "easy" to register when you get a drivers license. Then you demand illegals get a drivers license for "safety" reasons

And prestso - illegals can now vote. And not once state bothers to verify the people getting a license is a legal citizen

That would go against the intent of the Motor Voter

PostmodernProphet

01-31-2013, 05:06 PM

That does not justify their breaking our laws by illegal entry. We have laws to protect our nation , our culture and our freedoms. This massive illegal immigration(that is engineered) is allowed as an attack upon ALL of that. -Tyr

so you would say that once someone has been here illegally they should never be allowed to take steps to become legal?........

red states rule

01-31-2013, 05:10 PM

so you would say that once someone has been here illegally they should never be allowed to take steps to become legal?........

They can apply when they arrive back in their native country

PostmodernProphet

01-31-2013, 05:11 PM

I have to agree and re-state an earlier question by ConHog, are we willing to increase our taxes to pay for the added costs of "securing" our border?

it seems logical to me that if some employers seek to hire immigrants, they should bear the cost of financing the immigration system.......logically, if people can cross freely and legally to work here, there is no reason for illegal crossings except to transport drugs.....thus the cost of securing the border should go down, not up.......

red states rule

01-31-2013, 05:16 PM

it seems logical to me that if some employers seek to hire immigrants, they should bear the cost of financing the immigration system.......logically, if people can cross freely and legally to work here, there is no reason for illegal crossings except to transport drugs.....thus the cost of securing the border should go down, not up.......

It would make employing legal citizens much easier if Dems did not plug the plug on E-Verify.

Also you have Dem Mayors publicly defying the law by running "sanctuary cities" and it is natural citizens like me who foot the bill

What is fair about that PMP?

fj1200

01-31-2013, 05:18 PM

We're saying the same thing. If they are already here, get on to the 'gain legal status,' OR face the repercussions of enforcement of reforms. Can't get to one without the other.

I know, sorry. Just different way of saying the same thing and what gets emphasized.

PostmodernProphet

01-31-2013, 05:23 PM

It would make employing legal citizens much easier if Dems did not plug the plug on E-Verify.

Also you have Dem Mayors publicly defying the law by running "sanctuary cities" and it is natural citizens like me who foot the bill

What is fair about that PMP?

nothing....but creating an opportunity for people to enter the country LEGALLY to work eliminates the need for sanctuary cities, as there would be no illegals.......

PostmodernProphet

01-31-2013, 05:25 PM

They can apply when they arrive back in their native country

so if we pass a law that says if they can get a job here they can get a green card......and they already have a job here.....isn't it stupid to make them go home to get the green card?....do we really want another stupid law when we could have a smart one?.......

red states rule

01-31-2013, 05:26 PM

nothing....but creating an opportunity for people to enter the country LEGALLY to work eliminates the need for sanctuary cities, as there would be no illegals.......

PMP it is NOT about creating an opportunity for people to enter the country LEGALLY. It is about amnesty, creating a larger voting block then the black vote, and expanding the underclass that will depend on government for their subsistence

Please read my post on how Dems set up illegals to vote. I believe you are an attorney so you know what I am saying is correct

red states rule

01-31-2013, 05:32 PM

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/Foden20130131-Lipstick%20Amnesty20130130105116.jpg

Kathianne

01-31-2013, 06:09 PM

It would make employing legal citizens much easier if Dems did not plug the plug on E-Verify.

Also you have Dem Mayors publicly defying the law by running "sanctuary cities" and it is natural citizens like me who foot the bill

What is fair about that PMP?

I agree with your points on motor-voter, e-verify, and sanctuary cities. However, on the last, the very nature of giving them a path towards legality, will render such moot. There is nothing to stop a case regarding making it incumbent upon the states to either disallow motor voter OR verify citizenship. E-verify needs to be a point regarding hiring, if 'reform' is to go through.

The punishments must be severe and with 'repeat violations' must result in jail time. Note, this is for the employers, not the poor schmuck trying to feed their family.

red states rule

01-31-2013, 06:13 PM

I agree with your points on motor-voter, e-verify, and sanctuary cities. However, on the last, the very nature of giving them a path towards legality, will render such moot. There is nothing to stop a case regarding making it incumbent upon the states to either disallow motor voter OR verify citizenship. E-verify needs to be a point regarding hiring, if 'reform' is to go through.

The punishments must be severe and with 'repeat violations' must result in jail time. Note, this is for the employers, not the poor schmuck trying to feed their family.

Kat, my political hero gave amnesty to about 5 million and what did that accomplish? Dems would not secure the border and the illegals continued to pour in. Now, if the border is secured to stop the flow of illegals then more people (including me) would be open to talking about what to do with the illegals that are here now

Kathianne

01-31-2013, 06:18 PM

Kat, my political hero gave amnesty to about 5 million and what did that accomplish? Dems would not secure the border and the illegals continued to pour in. Now, if the border is secured to stop the flow of illegals then more people (including me) would be open to talking about what to do with the illegals that are here now

That there are now 11 million, to answer the first question. Now the same problem needs to be addressed imo, with reform before the path towards legality. I do not agree with the touchback, it's inherently unfair and will lead to 10's or more of thousands not coming forward, compounding the problems. Realistically there's only so much that can be done at the border, though what can be, should be. More important is making it economically ill-advised to enter illegally, no jobs for you! The employers will face too steep of penalties.

bingster

01-31-2013, 06:19 PM

Bing I am not seeing Obama or Dems talking about border security or enforcement. What all this "reform" is about is getting illegals to vote and expand the Dems base

I will give you Dems credit since you always create in 25 and 30 year plans to expand your grip on government

With Motor Voter you made it "easy" to register when you get a drivers license. Then you demand illegals get a drivers license for "safety" reasons

And prestso - illegals can now vote. And not once state bothers to verify the people getting a license is a legal citizen

That would go against the intent of the Motor Voter

Wow, you threw out a lot of issues there that I can't argue off of the top of my head.
Like I said, though, we have made leaps forward in security of the boarder. How much do you want to spend? Enforcement, I imagine you're referring to our "path to citizenship" that is being led by John McCain, exactly as he did in 2007 with Ted Kennedy, is regaridng having undocumented workers pay a fine, taxes, learn English, etc....
But Amen on most of what you said. You guys might get 30 to 35% of the Hispanic vote in a National election for your efforts, but I doubt it.

red states rule

01-31-2013, 06:21 PM

That there are now 11 million, to answer the first question. Now the same problem needs to be addressed imo, with reform before the path towards legality. I do not agree with the touchback, it's inherently unfair and will lead to 10's or more of thousands not coming forward, compounding the problems. Realistically there's only so much that can be done at the border, though what can be, should be. More important is making it economically ill-advised to enter illegally, no jobs for you! The employers will face too steep of penalties.

I remember well the deal made with Dems. Give the illegals amnesty and we "promise" to secure the borders. Well the borders were never secured. Just as with the deals to raise taxes with the promise to cut spending. I want the borders secured first them we can deal with the ones here. Any other way we might as well take down the border and merge the country with Mexico

red states rule

01-31-2013, 06:23 PM

Wow, you threw out a lot of issues there that I can't argue off of the top of my head.
Like I said, though, we have made leaps forward in security of the boarder. How much do you want to spend? Enforcement, I imagine you're referring to our "path to citizenship" that is being led by John McCain, exactly as he did in 2007 with Ted Kennedy, is regaridng having undocumented workers pay a fine, taxes, learn English, etc....
But Amen on most of what you said. You guys might get 30 to 35% of the Hispanic vote in a National election for your efforts, but I doubt it.

What steps? the border is still a sieve and Obama is not interested in secure the border Bink, they are ILLEGALS and not undocumented workers. Of course if you insist on calling them mother name try undocumented Democrats

Kathianne

01-31-2013, 06:28 PM

What steps? the border is still a sieve and Obama is not interested in secure the border Bink, they are ILLEGALS and not undocumented workers. Of course if you insist on calling them mother name try undocumented Democrats

I'll not say it's not still 'open' but fewer are bothering, due to our economy. Which is why this is the time to address the issue:

http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/Politics/illegal-immigration-united-states/story?id=17894215

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303459004577362211298534158.html

bingster

01-31-2013, 07:09 PM

What steps? the border is still a sieve and Obama is not interested in secure the border Bink, they are ILLEGALS and not undocumented workers. Of course if you insist on calling them mother name try undocumented Democrats

In addition to what Kathianne said, this administration has also deported more Mexicans every year than Bush ever did. Our border is not sieve. How much do you want to spend?

I like the undocumented Democrats. That's so true.

bingster

01-31-2013, 07:11 PM

I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally

bingster

01-31-2013, 07:30 PM

What steps? the border is still a sieve and Obama is not interested in secure the border Bink, they are ILLEGALS and not undocumented workers. Of course if you insist on calling them mother name try undocumented Democrats

http://hispanicleadershipnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/HLN-Dos-and-Donts-of-Immigration-Reform-Mes-saging.pdf

Some advice for the Todd Akins in your party. It's a conservative tip sheet.

red states rule

02-01-2013, 03:25 AM

I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally

Libs love to chant "So goes CA so goes the nation"

They may be on to something

California Spends $21 Billion Annually to Support Undocumented Immigrants

Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael Antonovich reveals the cost of local illegal immigration, and the figures are staggering. When combining the numbers for the CalWORKs program ($22 million) and food stamps assistance ($31 million), the sum totals a confounding $53 million (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=Aon09.K.QKOrb6aIyn49jwoEKekE;_ylu=X3oDMTFqMDg xZXM0BG1pdANBcnRpY2xlIEJvZHkEcG9zAzEEc2VjA01lZGlhQ XJ0aWNsZUJvZHlBc3NlbWJseQ--;_ylg=X3oDMTM5ZmN2YzJ1BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRw c3RhaWQDNDVhNTY1ZjMtYmMwNi0zMjcyLTg3ZGQtMDQyOTUyZW Q2OWU4BHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljc3xwcmVzc3JlbGVhc2VzBHB0 A3N0b3J5cGFnZQ--;_ylv=0/SIG=13u5mejdi/EXP=1360916659/**http%3A//antonovich.lacounty.gov/Pages/Press%2520Releases/11/January/Illegal%2520Immigration%2520011911.html) paid to support American-born children of illegal aliens.

Stepping back a bit further, Los Angeles County Supervisor Antonovich explains that 22 percent of CalWORKs and food stamp benefits within the county go to undocumented immigrants. Additional costs of approximately $500 million for health care, $550 million for public safety and $570 million for CalWORKs and food stamps bring the grand total to an estimated $1.6 billion.

This is not the first time that Antonovich sounds the alarm bells for the county of Los Angeles. In May 2010 his office issued a similar news release (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=AmZrB1FBnaSht_WYHhP0sywEKekE;_ylu=X3oDMTFqaWd 2Ymg3BG1pdANBcnRpY2xlIEJvZHkEcG9zAzIEc2VjA01lZGlhQ XJ0aWNsZUJvZHlBc3NlbWJseQ--;_ylg=X3oDMTM5ZmN2YzJ1BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRw c3RhaWQDNDVhNTY1ZjMtYmMwNi0zMjcyLTg3ZGQtMDQyOTUyZW Q2OWU4BHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljc3xwcmVzc3JlbGVhc2VzBHB0 A3N0b3J5cGFnZQ--;_ylv=0/SIG=14u1vqfnc/EXP=1360916659/**http%3A//antonovich.lacounty.gov/Pages/Press%2520Releases/10/May/Children%2520of%2520illegal%2520aliens%2520welfare %2520costs%252052810.html). It outlined that the cost for the support of illegal immigrants' children stood at $52 million while overall the cost for illegal immigrants -- borne by L.A. County taxpayers -- exceeded $1 billion. It is clear that his warnings fell on deaf ears.

Of course, illegal immigration is not a social issue endemic only to Los Angeles County. Undocumented immigrants present a fiscal drain for taxpayers all over the Golden State. In fact, nationwide California leads the pack with an expenditure of $21 billion on illegal aliens (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=AllLFMkfWJobKAh2TlMJCboEKekE;_ylu=X3oDMTFqaTN jbzlmBG1pdANBcnRpY2xlIEJvZHkEcG9zAzMEc2VjA01lZGlhQ XJ0aWNsZUJvZHlBc3NlbWJseQ--;_ylg=X3oDMTM5ZmN2YzJ1BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRw c3RhaWQDNDVhNTY1ZjMtYmMwNi0zMjcyLTg3ZGQtMDQyOTUyZW Q2OWU4BHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljc3xwcmVzc3JlbGVhc2VzBHB0 A3N0b3J5cGFnZQ--;_ylv=0/SIG=12me8muit/EXP=1360916659/**http%3A//www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/2010/07/05/daily42.html) (compare this to the $84.2 billion figure that denotes the statewide cost for undocumented workers across the nation).

http://news.yahoo.com/california-spends-21-billion-annually-support-undocumented-immigrants-20110126-102900-435.html

PostmodernProphet

02-01-2013, 09:19 PM

PMP it is NOT about creating an opportunity for people to enter the country LEGALLY. It is about amnesty

well, the fact remains that unless we do something to create a way for people who want to come here to come here legally the problem will never be solved......you can flap your gums about the "amnesty" word all you want but we've seen that all we've done is waste the last eight years and not solved the problem.....

I'll be honest......I'm more concerned about solving the problem and moving forward than I am about "punishing" thirty million people......

PostmodernProphet

02-01-2013, 09:22 PM

trying to "secure the border" first is like trying to fix a plumbing leak without turning off the water first........

aboutime

02-01-2013, 09:42 PM

We Americans are being warned by the Obama administration to CEASE using the word ILLEGAL.

Fine...won't say it again. How bout SIGN Language????

4435 Thanks to this guy...4436

Robert A Whit

02-01-2013, 09:44 PM

it seems logical to me that if some employers seek to hire immigrants, they should bear the cost of financing the immigration system.......logically, if people can cross freely and legally to work here, there is no reason for illegal crossings except to transport drugs.....thus the cost of securing the border should go down, not up.......

I am so baffled by Democrats. They are not logical.

Review their stated positions.

Illegals cross over and once here, Democrats damned well want them here. If an illegal bears a child, they want them all to stay.

They claim illegals will do jobs nobody else will.

Then they tell us they want the employer punished if they hire one.

So, they need a job. But hire one and the Democrats want the company boss punished.

Well, if they do jobs nobody else will, and you want them here, why the hell do you punish the company for handing them an income?

The person who illegally crossed gets no punishment. But by god just hire one and maybe go to jail.

bingster

02-02-2013, 02:25 PM

Libs love to chant "So goes CA so goes the nation"

They may be on to something
 "I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally," Ronald Reagan.

First of all, I'm for securing our borders, I just think they are a lot more secure than conservatives will admit. Second, part of the path to citizenship is paying taxes and a fine.
Third, all articles like yours miss an important point: By far a vast majority of undocumented workers pay payroll taxes and social security taxes. I have yet not seen an article that combines cost with revenue. Here's one about revenue:

http://reason.org/news/show/122411.html

(http://reason.org/news/show/122411.html)

bingster

02-02-2013, 02:31 PM

We Americans are being warned by the Obama administration to CEASE using the word ILLEGAL.

Fine...won't say it again. How bout SIGN Language????

4435 Thanks to this guy...4436

The link I posted yesterday was from a conservative site that advised conservatives to stop using the "illegal" word. I guess it's related to Bobby Jindal's "We have to stop being the stupid party" project.

bingster

02-02-2013, 02:41 PM

I am so baffled by Democrats. They are not logical.

Review their stated positions.

Illegals cross over and once here, Democrats damned well want them here. If an illegal bears a child, they want them all to stay.

They claim illegals will do jobs nobody else will.

Then they tell us they want the employer punished if they hire one.

So, they need a job. But hire one and the Democrats want the company boss punished.

Well, if they do jobs nobody else will, and you want them here, why the hell do you punish the company for handing them an income?

The person who illegally crossed gets no punishment. But by god just hire one and maybe go to jail.

I think you're missing the "magnet" concept. If you don't block companies from hiring undocumented workers, they will come in larger numbers. If you block employment, the concept believes you block immigration.

Also, I don't think you can call John McCain, Marco Rubio, George W. Bush, or Reagan Democrats. They have all come out for the same measures, the same "logic" as Democrats have on this issue.

PostmodernProphet

02-02-2013, 06:38 PM

for two hundred years this country invited anyone who wanted to come to move here.....then, about fifty years ago we said, no......only about 65,000 a year.....we've been getting dumber every year since......

Robert A Whit

02-02-2013, 07:15 PM

In addition to what Kathianne said, this administration has also deported more Mexicans every year than Bush ever did. Our border is not sieve. How much do you want to spend?

I like the undocumented Democrats. That's so true.

You say Obama is booting them out of this country in record numbers but you also claim they are undocumented democrats?

If they are so stupid as to vote for the party that holds the record for booting them out, maybe we don't want them.

Robert A Whit

02-02-2013, 07:24 PM

for two hundred years this country invited anyone who wanted to come to move here.....then, about fifty years ago we said, no......only about 65,000 a year.....we've been getting dumber every year since......

I plan to speak a lot about what I am going to call it, THE CONE OF HISTORY.

But you are very wrong. Maybe you forgot Ellis Island. I have been there. Not only are the buildings extremely old, they are very run down.

But we in CA have our own Ellis Island. Ours is called Angel Island. It too has very old buildings and most of them are very run down. We have restored some of them however.

Ellis Island opened I believe prior to 1900 and you bet your bones those immigrants were screened and kept out. When your great FDR was the thug in charge, he flat banned Jews from moving to the USA above a very small number.

We have a serious problem. While it is claimed that our poor economy is why Mexicans stopped flooding our borders, only the bad economy seems to be a true barrier. I wonder why the hell we want or need more "Indians" from Mexico given we have plenty of them (Native Americans) living in this couuntry who were here before the white man showed up? Why not offer our own natives those jobs?

Robert A Whit

02-02-2013, 07:30 PM

I think you're missing the "magnet" concept. If you don't block companies from hiring undocumented workers, they will come in larger numbers. If you block employment, the concept believes you block immigration.

Also, I don't think you can call John McCain, Marco Rubio, George W. Bush, or Reagan Democrats. They have all come out for the same measures, the same "logic" as Democrats have on this issue.

So admit that when you prevent them from having a legal job, you either want them on welfare or you want them gone.

You Democrats sure work in mysterious ways.

Then you brag that Obama holds the record for booting them back to Mexico.

You guys plain don't deal in logic.

What is not logical for Mexicans to support the party that brags it holds the record for booting them right back to Mexico.

I know a Mexican who I can ask what he thinks.

Kathianne

02-02-2013, 08:07 PM

Actually, Ellis and Angel Islands provided very different experiences for people hoping to enter the US.

Ellis Island (http://www.ellisisland.org/Immexp/index.asp) required documents showing that the immigrant was 'a good citizen and without criminal record' from their home country. Then they were observed regarding health. In the main, it was the health issues that could block entrance into the US.

Angel Island was a very different experience (http://sun.menloschool.org/%7Embrody/ushistory/angel/citizenship/), simply due to racism against the Asians.

Kathianne

02-02-2013, 08:12 PM

More on the differences:

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~hist32/History/S12%20-%20Angel%20Island.htm

Many Americans focus on Ellis Island when considering the American immigrant experience. This island, the primary immigration station on the east coast from 1892 until 1954, served as the point-of-entry for 20 million Americans; 40% of Americans have ancestors who entered the US through the Ellis Island station. (Ellis Island Virtual Tour) Stories and images from this station have become an important part of American culture. Most American children have heard stories of young European immigrants arriving and settling in New York City, and pictures of new immigrants spilling off boats and into the Great Hall at Ellis Island abound in history textbooks and modern media. In contrast, the average American knows nothing about Angel Island, the primary immigration station on the west coast of the US between the years of 1910 and 1940.

When first learning about Angel Island, one notices the similarities between Angel Island and Ellis Island. The US government open both Angel Island and Ellis Island after 1891 when the government created its first immigration administration. Both stations sit on picturesque islands in the middle of prominent US ports. Today both islands are run as historic monuments. However, when one begins to look closely at both the history of the islands and the place of the islands today, one notices many differences. These differences offer insights into the continuing inequities faced by Asian American immigrants to the US.

Asian Immigrants arriving at Angel Islands faced an ordeal at the Island which often lasted longer than their voyage from Asia. Most Immigrants were detained an average of two weeks with some staying as long as 2 years. During this detention, the government kept the immigrants locked in cramped rooms with no privacy, and no source of distraction; “‘When we arrived . . they locked us up like criminals in compartments like cages in the zoo. They counted us and then took us upstairs to our rooms. There were two or three rooms in the women’s section . . Each of the rooms could fit twenty or thirty persons.’ The men were placed in one large room. There were 190 ‘small boys to old men, all together in the same room’”. (Takaki, 237) Immigrants at Ellis Island, in contrast, were rarely detained long, and instead passed through the station with a series of quick (albeit terrifying) examinations to determine their physical and mental health.

The long detentions of Asian (specifically Chinese) immigrants resulted from the Chinese exclusion act of 1882. This act allowed only the wives and children of Chinese merchants already living in the US to enter the US. After this act passed and the San Francisco earthquake of 1906 destroyed most immigration records in San Francisco, immigration officials began to question immigrants rigorously to prevent the entry of “paper sons” and “paper wives”--immigrants who posed as family members of Chinese already living in the US in order to gain admittance to the US. These examinations proved extremely rigorous and only half of the immigrants passed on their first try. (Pugh) “Each immigrant <was> asked from two or three hundred questions to over a thousand. The records of the hearing generally <ran> in length from twenty to eighty typewritten pages depending on the nature of the case.” (Yung, 66) Immigrants trying to pass these exams would often face questions like “How many steps in your house?” “Your house had a clock?” “Where do you sleep at your house?” (Takaki, 236) European immigrants at Ellis Island had to answer only 29 questions as no laws like the Chinese Exclusion act existed to limit their entry into the country. (Yung, 66).

</ran></was>

Asian Immigrants arriving at Angel Island had very different experiences from European immigrants arriving at Ellis Island because of racist laws concerning Asian immigration. One would like to think that these racist attitudes existed only in the past, however the recent histories of Ellis and Angel Island suggest that although the US government no longer discriminates against Asian immigrants, US culture does not yet consider the experiences of Asian immigrants to be as important as those of European immigrants.

The immigration station at Angel Island opened for tours in 1972 (Dembling). However, the buildings have become dilapidated, endangering many of the artifacts within the station. “Maintenance on Angel Island, which is dotted with crumbling military barracks, mess halls, and hospitals, is further behind than any park in the state system . . Inside on the yellow and green peeling walls fragile poems carved mostly by Chinese detainees are framed only by string and pushpins.” (Minton) The station is further blighted by exhibits which do not accurately depict the history of Asian immigration. A classic photograph of European immigrants entering Ellis Island greets visitors to the Angel Island station today, essentially overlooking the 200,000 Asian immigrants who entered through the station. Inside a female Chinese dummy in an exhibit wears a queue, despite the fact that only men wore queues under the Qing Dynasty. (Dembling)

The current exhibit in no way does justice to the experience of Asian Americans at Angel Island, yet the current yearly budget of $200,000 dollars cannot cover basic repairs needed, much less make improvements. (Minton) Ellis Island experiences none of these problems. In 1990 the government (aided by a fiscal campaign run by Lee Iococa) completed a 160 million dollar renovation and the elegantly restored Station and new Wall of Immigrants monument opened to the public (Ellis Island Virtual Tour).

...

Robert A Whit

02-02-2013, 08:24 PM

My niece is married for many years to a guy from Mexico who due to the Reagan Amnesty became a citizen. They have three children that all graduted from High school. (2 have not yet finished school) She told me this Saturday AM she and her husband voted for Romney. She told me that a lot of Mexicans won't vote for Democrats since they became citizens due to what Reagan did for them. They don't like it that Obama brags he boots out record numbers of Mexicans. Her husband and her lost their home. He was a supervisor on highway construction but Obama did not save him from losing his job. He works here and there and she told me he hopes to work starting next week on the BART project.

Obama has been trying to buy their loyalty to him. Illegals are not supposed to be voting but I am led to think that Illegals are able to get drivers licenses and it is claimed the illegals are voting.

Dammit.

bingster

02-02-2013, 10:41 PM

So admit that when you prevent them from having a legal job, you either want them on welfare or you want them gone.

You Democrats sure work in mysterious ways.

Then you brag that Obama holds the record for booting them back to Mexico.

You guys plain don't deal in logic.

What is not logical for Mexicans to support the party that brags it holds the record for booting them right back to Mexico.

I know a Mexican who I can ask what he thinks.

Once they become citizens and learn English I'll be happy to offer them jobs. Like I said, though, many of them have jobs with faked documents and are paying payroll taxes as well as Social Security that they will never collect. It's not a binary condition. Welfare or gone is inaccurate. They are here for the work.
I'm not bragging about Obama holding a record, I'm just pointing out the conservatives weak ass arguments that Obama is weak on enforcement.
I'm proud of you for having a Mexican friend.

bingster

02-02-2013, 10:45 PM

My niece is married for many years to a guy from Mexico who due to the Reagan Amnesty became a citizen. They have three children that all graduted from High school. (2 have not yet finished school) She told me this Saturday AM she and her husband voted for Romney. She told me that a lot of Mexicans won't vote for Democrats since they became citizens due to what Reagan did for them. They don't like it that Obama brags he boots out record numbers of Mexicans. Her husband and her lost their home. He was a supervisor on highway construction but Obama did not save him from losing his job. He works here and there and she told me he hopes to work starting next week on the BART project.

Obama has been trying to buy their loyalty to him. Illegals are not supposed to be voting but I am led to think that Illegals are able to get drivers licenses and it is claimed the illegals are voting.

Dammit.

The Hispanic population is not a monolithic one issue group. On a recent poll, they prefer Democrats over Republicans on every issue. Immigration is only one of those issues, and Obama would have taken care of it in the first term had the conservatives played ball. Republicans don't give a crap now, they just saw the polls and realize they better get with the program or join the Green Party in irrelevance.

bingster

02-02-2013, 10:56 PM

More on the differences:

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~hist32/History/S12%20-%20Angel%20Island.htm

h

PostmodernProphet

02-03-2013, 09:34 AM

you bet your bones those immigrants were screened and kept out.

?.....if you are going to write about history you had better learn a bit about it.......the first limits on immigration were passed in the 1920s.....they were put in place to limit the immigration of Italians, Slavs, and Jews.......shortly after WW2 we actually DEPORTED almost 1.5 million Mexicans......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States

both my grandfathers and one grandmother came through Ellis Island.....one grandfather's papers identified his occupation as "man servant"......the other two were children when they arrived....

Toro

02-03-2013, 09:04 PM

I became an American citizen last year. I am proud to be an American. I still look at my passport in wonderment.

However, the American immigration system is fracked. We spent years and literally tens of thousands of dollars navigating the maze of immigration law. It is a deterrent for talented people to come here.

bingster

02-03-2013, 11:59 PM

I became an American citizen last year. I am proud to be an American. I still look at my passport in wonderment.

However, the American immigration system is fracked. We spent years and literally tens of thousands of dollars navigating the maze of immigration law. It is a deterrent for talented people to come here.

I've heard it takes years for anyone to get their citizenship. I hope they figure out how to make it faster in the reform bill the Congress is putting together. I saw a flow chart that showed like 45 different hoops you have to go through and a bunch of stop signs that would deny you if you didn't fulfill certain circumstances. You're right, it's fracked.

Welcome to America!!! :)

Robert A Whit

02-04-2013, 12:23 AM

Once they become citizens and learn English I'll be happy to offer them jobs. Like I said, though, many of them have jobs with faked documents and are paying payroll taxes as well as Social Security that they will never collect. It's not a binary condition. Welfare or gone is inaccurate. They are here for the work.
I'm not bragging about Obama holding a record, I'm just pointing out the conservatives weak ass arguments that Obama is weak on enforcement.
I'm proud of you for having a Mexican friend.

They are here now. How are they to survive very long if they don't have a job? When you put their boss into jail, do you expect them to find another boss.

The Mexican married my niece after 1980. He is a legal citizen with kids just out of high school.

I called him and he does not like Obama nor will he vote for Democrats. He votes for republicans. He recalls who gave him amnesty.

He has citizenship documents and has had them for decades.

I think Obama should post his picture at the Mexican border and brag to them how he holds the record for giving the most of them the boot.

Have his exploits put on their TV shows and brag his ass off. Show them how many of them he has kicked out.

BTW, I have sold this Mexican several homes and sold one of them for him.

Robert A Whit

02-04-2013, 12:32 AM

?.....if you are going to write about history you had better learn a bit about it.......the first limits on immigration were passed in the 1920s.....they were put in place to limit the immigration of Italians, Slavs, and Jews.......shortly after WW2 we actually DEPORTED almost 1.5 million Mexicans......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States

both my grandfathers and one grandmother came through Ellis Island.....one grandfather's papers identified his occupation as "man servant"......the other two were children when they arrived....

Nope, they put a choke hold on Chinese at Angel Island that sits in the San Francisco Bay. I have been on the Island during the time of day when in a ceremony they fire a cannon as they did during our Civil War. This cannon is circa our Civil war. Buildings on that island were used to screen hundreds of thousands of Chinese in the 1800s.

I get a laugh when somebody tells me to learn history given I have been on Ellis Island and toured a building as well as doing the same thing at Angel Island. I call this the forgotten Island.

Robert A Whit

02-04-2013, 01:45 AM

Nope, they put a choke hold on Chinese at Angel Island that sits in the San Francisco Bay. I have been on the Island during the time of day when in a ceremony they fire a cannon as they did during our Civil War. This cannon is circa our Civil war. Buildings on that island were used to screen hundreds of thousands of Chinese in the 1800s.

I get a laugh when somebody tells me to learn history given I have been on Ellis Island and toured a building as well as doing the same thing at Angel Island. I call this the forgotten Island.

OOps, Reading my post, one assumes that I was saying that the Chinese were being screened as immigrants before Ellis Island opened. Well, I admit that was my deed. LOL

So, since I NOW looked up the actual years both opened, beat me with a pound of wet noodles. I goofed up. Ellis opened in 1892 vs Angel Island in 1910.

To my defense, your honor ... I only say that living here in the SF bay area for my life, I am well acquainted with the fact that Chinese came to work and it was not long that they were thought of as sub-humans.

I believe the barracks on Angel Island were first Army barracks.

There are trails all over Angel Island and some of them I have hiked on. And I recall some of the buildings on Angel are in restored condition. If you plan to go there, I advise you do a bit of research first since the island is a very large hill and larger than you may suspect. Also, I believe the deer are still there. This means you may wish to goof off looking at the wild life. Some of the old buildings are open and you may want to spend a good deal of time going through them and talking to the care takers.

They fire the cannon only a few times per day and put on quite a show.

Should you go to Angel Island, if you want to take a nice ferry ride, I caught the ferry from Sausalito I believe. LOL, I may have the wrong hamlet named for all I know. I plan after I am done scratching my ass to verify that hamlet too. LOL

Well done with that chore.

Yup, it is Sausalito. They also have some cool places to eat there at Sausalito.

You can get some food at angel Island but I recommend meals at Sausalito.

red states rule

02-04-2013, 04:56 AM

well, the fact remains that unless we do something to create a way for people who want to come here to come here legally the problem will never be solved......you can flap your gums about the "amnesty" word all you want but we've seen that all we've done is waste the last eight years and not solved the problem.....

I'll be honest......I'm more concerned about solving the problem and moving forward than I am about "punishing" thirty million people......

I like how libs try to sell their plan with "they will pay taxes and go tot he back of the line"

What they leave out is the illegals are still here, still getting welfare benefits, taking more money (ie taxpayer dollars) out of the system then they are paying in

All in all, another great money laundering scheme to lock up another voting block to keep America in the express lane to bankruptcy

PostmodernProphet

02-04-2013, 10:04 AM

I get a laugh when somebody tells me to learn history

you would have been wiser to actually learn instead of laugh.....did you even read the link I provided you?....

PostmodernProphet

02-04-2013, 10:07 AM

illegals are still here, still getting welfare benefits

and yet, no one seems to want to take any action.......both left and right are acting like idiots on this issue.....I'm getting tired of it.....

bingster

02-04-2013, 02:10 PM

I like how libs try to sell their plan with "they will pay taxes and go tot he back of the line"

What they leave out is the illegals are still here, still getting welfare benefits, taking more money (ie taxpayer dollars) out of the system then they are paying in

All in all, another great money laundering scheme to lock up another voting block to keep America in the express lane to bankruptcy

I love how R's always blame the Libs when it was Reagan who doled out the last amnesty and John McCain has been the main guy leading the charge since at least 2007.

I'm sure there are some undocumented workers who have managed to slip through all of the laws that forbid them from getting welfare, but I've never seen an article that also accounts for all of the payroll and social security that MOST of them are paying. They aren't here to be on welfare, they are here to work and usually are employed.

bingster

02-04-2013, 02:25 PM

They are here now. How are they to survive very long if they don't have a job? When you put their boss into jail, do you expect them to find another boss.

The Mexican married my niece after 1980. He is a legal citizen with kids just out of high school.

I called him and he does not like Obama nor will he vote for Democrats. He votes for republicans. He recalls who gave him amnesty.

He has citizenship documents and has had them for decades.

I think Obama should post his picture at the Mexican border and brag to them how he holds the record for giving the most of them the boot.

Have his exploits put on their TV shows and brag his ass off. Show them how many of them he has kicked out.

BTW, I have sold this Mexican several homes and sold one of them for him.

Obama's policies have been tough on Mexicans but he would have had a better policy earlier had the Republicans not been obstructing this issue since day one. I wish he didn't mention his high record for booting them out, but it's politics. You're damn if you do, damned if you don't. He hurts his left flank when he brags, but he brags to defend himself against the right. Then Obama made his left happy with his executive order regarding Dream Immigrants and caught hell from his right again. The irony is, your Mexican friend likes Reagan for the same reason Republicans hate Obama. The dumb part is that Republicans are hating a straw man on this issue.

As for your 1st point regarding survival after the boss goes to jail, I really don't know. The most vital part of this issue is over-all timing. You shouldn't be able to punish employers until you make it easier to prove an employee is legal or illegal. While this process is going on, hopefully you can also offer current undocumented workers some kind of temporary status that keeps them from being illegal. Like another poster mentioned, there's also a major bottleneck in the immigration system itself and takes many years to get through. This all has to be fixed.

Robert A Whit

02-04-2013, 02:26 PM

you would have been wiser to actually learn instead of laugh.....did you even read the link I provided you?....

If I gave you a sack of poison, would you eat any of it?

bingster

02-04-2013, 02:27 PM

and yet, no one seems to want to take any action.......both left and right are acting like idiots on this issue.....I'm getting tired of it.....

I'm sorry, isn't what's going on now "action"? I admit, it's way too late but Republicans have blocked action on this for quite a while. Even when McCain and Kenedy tried to act in 2007, it was the conservatives that blew it up.

bingster

02-04-2013, 02:29 PM

If I gave you a sack of poison, would you eat any of it?

Gee, Robert, that's harsh. Are you in a bad mood? Did you pick the 49ers last night?

Robert A Whit

02-04-2013, 02:46 PM

I love how R's always blame the Libs when it was Reagan who doled out the last amnesty and John McCain has been the main guy leading the charge since at least 2007.

I'm sure there are some undocumented workers who have managed to slip through all of the laws that forbid them from getting welfare, but I've never seen an article that also accounts for all of the payroll and social security that MOST of them are paying. They aren't here to be on welfare, they are here to work and usually are employed.

Let me introduce you to Jesus who came here from Mexico.

He got Amnesty from our nations best president, Ronald Magnus Reagan.

And he is a citizen of this country. Became a boss over labor crews working on highways.

Wed and raised or is still raising, 5 kids.

So why mention Jesus?

When Obama ran for the P job in 2008, I asked him what he thinks about the illegal Mexicans.

I really figured he wold defend them and give me a lecture why they belong here.

Much to my surprise, he informned me he does not want them to get amnesty and wants them to be in line. See, now it is his job that is in danger.

He votes for republicans and tells me he won't ever support Obama or Democrats.

Robert A Whit

02-04-2013, 02:56 PM

Gee, Robert, that's harsh. Are you in a bad mood? Did you pick the 49ers last night?

LMAO

I did not mean it the way it looks. Gee, I have to be much more open with explanations.

He chided me for not using his link so I got this silly idea I could sort of reverse the idea.

Oh hell yes I support the 49ers. They damned near won. A lot of speculation is that had the refs called pass interference, the team might not have lost.

But my take on the game is much more direct. It is not normal for the 49ers to allow a guy to run 108 yards for a touchdown. They are deadly tacklers and fast as hell. But this mistake cost the game.

Then if you noticed, they came close to shutting out the Ravens in the second half.

bingster

02-04-2013, 03:23 PM

Let me introduce you to Jesus who came here from Mexico.

He got Amnesty from our nations best president, Ronald Magnus Reagan.

And he is a citizen of this country. Became a boss over labor crews working on highways.

Wed and raised or is still raising, 5 kids.

So why mention Jesus?

When Obama ran for the P job in 2008, I asked him what he thinks about the illegal Mexicans.

I really figured he wold defend them and give me a lecture why they belong here.

Much to my surprise, he informned me he does not want them to get amnesty and wants them to be in line. See, now it is his job that is in danger.

He votes for republicans and tells me he won't ever support Obama or Democrats.

Not to bash your friend, but don't you see the hypocrisy in his position? He was given a hand by Reagan but would be offended by the same hand given by Obama to someone else? Kinda self-serving.

bingster

02-04-2013, 03:23 PM

LMAO

I did not mean it the way it looks. Gee, I have to be much more open with explanations.

He chided me for not using his link so I got this silly idea I could sort of reverse the idea.

Oh hell yes I support the 49ers. They damned near won. A lot of speculation is that had the refs called pass interference, the team might not have lost.

But my take on the game is much more direct. It is not normal for the 49ers to allow a guy to run 108 yards for a touchdown. They are deadly tacklers and fast as hell. But this mistake cost the game.

Then if you noticed, they came close to shutting out the Ravens in the second half.

It was an awesome comeback and I was rooting for the 49rs also.

Robert A Whit

02-04-2013, 03:29 PM

I'm sorry, isn't what's going on now "action"? I admit, it's way too late but Republicans have blocked action on this for quite a while. Even when McCain and Kenedy tried to act in 2007, it was the conservatives that blew it up.

Remind me why we must have all of these illegal aliens again?

Robert A Whit

02-04-2013, 03:32 PM

Not to bash your friend, but don't you see the hypocrisy in his position? He was given a hand by Reagan but would be offended by the same hand given by Obama to someone else? Kinda self-serving.

Well, long ago he supported such amnesty. But when it is his job on the line, now do you understand?

Robert A Whit

02-04-2013, 03:42 PM

A note on the Superbowl since it is mentioned on this thread.

I am unhappy that the 49rs lost. Would anybody expect me to be leaping with joy since they have long been a favorite team? LOL

Am I mad?

Nope.

If this was 1965, I probably would be pissed off for a week.

But I got over that crazy stuff many years ago.

Those who played the game can spend their time being pissed.

When my Fast pitch softball team came in 2nd place in the national championship games, I was a lot more pissed than a football game can make me. That lasted for 2 seconds. I knew what my team had done that day. The difficulty of playing 5 complete games in one day.

Who can do that?

The team we lost to only played 3 games and even that was tough.

Each game lasted about 2 hours.

Why blame a pitcher that had to play all 5 games?

No, I was not happy to win second place but my team busted balls all season long.

They played some of the best teams in this country and we won about 85 percent of them.

What you say, only a dozen games in one year?

No friends, my team played 109 games over the season and we won almost every tournament we were in. Those guys were awesome.

So are the 49ers.

Hey for those of you that think fast pitch softball is easy, try hitting a ball coming at you at over 90 mph and the pitcher only 46 feet from you. Major leage games pitch from 60 feet. I have seen some of the best pitchers at various games who could top 100 mph.

My team beat King Eddie Feiner one time. We really pissed him off.

We won 8-2 playing at a field in San Mateo on El Camino Real.

Eddie is dead. But on youtube, there are several videos showing him. This one is in black and white but shows prett much how he was when we beat him. Notice the video gives data on games he won and batters he struck out.

http://youtu.be/cbbYx_FqtHU

bingster

02-04-2013, 04:26 PM

Remind me why we must have all of these illegal aliens again?

Because we have them already. How would your friend feel if we booted them all?

Kathianne

02-04-2013, 04:34 PM

Because we have them already. How would your friend feel if we booted them all?

better question: How are we to identify and boot them all? Can't be done, it's a rhetorical question.

aboutime

02-04-2013, 05:50 PM

better question: How are we to identify and boot them all? Can't be done, it's a rhetorical question.

Bingster. Perhaps you would like to tell us the name of the person who has suggested Booting them All????

You do understand the meaning Kathianne used above...'rhetorically' Don't you?

bingster

02-04-2013, 07:41 PM

Bingster. Perhaps you would like to tell us the name of the person who has suggested Booting them All????

You do understand the meaning Kathianne used above...'rhetorically' Don't you?

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Robert A Whit http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=614707#post614707)
Remind me why we must have all of these illegal aliens again?

This was the questioned I answered. Do you understand the meaning Kathianne used above...'rhetorically' Don't you?

Patronize yourself genius!

aboutime

02-04-2013, 08:10 PM

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Robert A Whit http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=614707#post614707)
Remind me why we must have all of these illegal aliens again?

This was the questioned I answered. Do you understand the meaning Kathianne used above...'rhetorically' Don't you?

Patronize yourself genius!

Aw! Somebody was exposed for the hyperbole, and is now fighting back like the child we all expected to hear.

red states rule

02-05-2013, 03:43 AM

I love how R's always blame the Libs when it was Reagan who doled out the last amnesty and John McCain has been the main guy leading the charge since at least 2007.

I'm sure there are some undocumented workers who have managed to slip through all of the laws that forbid them from getting welfare, but I've never seen an article that also accounts for all of the payroll and social security that MOST of them are paying. They aren't here to be on welfare, they are here to work and usually are employed.

I am on the record as stating it was a huge mistake by Pres Reagan to grant amnesty to illegals

Bing you can continue to not use the word "ILLEGAL" but that is the correct term to describe these people

There have been many studies that prove they will take much more out of the system then they would ever pay in since most of their jobs are low skill jobs. And I can see how adding millions more to the pool of people looking for work will help those legal US citizens find work. Then again, like most of the left's polices the people you claim to want to help end up getting screwed over

So much for the left helping the middle class. Getting those undocumented Democrats to the polls means more then helping those who supported your party in the last 2 elections

red states rule

02-05-2013, 04:21 AM

Remind me why we must have all of these illegal aliens again?

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/gv020413dAPR20130204044512.jpg

PostmodernProphet

02-05-2013, 08:44 AM

If I gave you a sack of poison, would you eat any of it?

well, at least it explains why you remain ignorant.....

PostmodernProphet

02-05-2013, 08:45 AM

I'm sorry, isn't what's going on now "action"? I admit, it's way too late but Republicans have blocked action on this for quite a while. Even when McCain and Kenedy tried to act in 2007, it was the conservatives that blew it up.

actually no.....its talk......we will have to wait and see if there is action.....

bingster

02-05-2013, 05:44 PM

I am on the record as stating it was a huge mistake by Pres Reagan to grant amnesty to illegals

Bing you can continue to not use the word "ILLEGAL" but that is the correct term to describe these people

There have been many studies that prove they will take much more out of the system then they would ever pay in since most of their jobs are low skill jobs. And I can see how adding millions more to the pool of people looking for work will help those legal US citizens find work. Then again, like most of the left's polices the people you claim to want to help end up getting screwed over

So much for the left helping the middle class. Getting those undocumented Democrats to the polls means more then helping those who supported your party in the last 2 elections

I'll use the terms I prefer. Again, this hasn't just been a liberal issue, Reagan and George W had the same things in mind that this 8 person senatorial group has in mind. 8 senators: 4 Republican and 4 Democrats. I agree, though, it has become a liberal cause from the eyes of hispanics, that's why Obama got 74% of their vote.

Your party can leave it for the Democrats and we'll continue to take 74% of the Hispanic vote, 74% of the Oriental vote, something like 90% of the black vote, 60-70% of the women vote, and something like 60-70% of the under 30 vote. I really don't mind if your party keeps along this track. Old white guys are dying and 50,000 Hispanics are being born every month. Texas is only 45% white, you know. Obama even got 45% of Georgia's vote. Keep the status quo, I would appreciate it.

bingster

02-05-2013, 05:45 PM

actually no.....its talk......we will have to wait and see if there is action.....

I'm worried the far right will kill it in congress. You're right not to consider it in the bag.

red states rule

02-06-2013, 02:26 AM

I'll use the terms I prefer. Again, this hasn't just been a liberal issue, Reagan and George W had the same things in mind that this 8 person senatorial group has in mind. 8 senators: 4 Republican and 4 Democrats. I agree, though, it has become a liberal cause from the eyes of hispanics, that's why Obama got 74% of their vote.

Your party can leave it for the Democrats and we'll continue to take 74% of the Hispanic vote, 74% of the Oriental vote, something like 90% of the black vote, 60-70% of the women vote, and something like 60-70% of the under 30 vote. I really don't mind if your party keeps along this track. Old white guys are dying and 50,000 Hispanics are being born every month. Texas is only 45% white, you know. Obama even got 45% of Georgia's vote. Keep the status quo, I would appreciate it.

Last I checked even after Reagan granted amnesty to ILLEGALS - Bush 41 got a lower percentage of the Latino vote

So thank you for fessing up this scheme by libs is all about locking up another voting block regardless of the cost to US taxpayers. And for showing us your bigotry towards those who have this naive idea of the government enforcing the laws on the books

You are beginning to remind me of another die hard Dem who was once (or so he claimed) was a Naval Commander and had the disdain toward those who spoke out about what libs were doing to this nation