"SAY GOODBYE REPUBLICANS" if you pull this shit, might as well eliminate the party...

[BlackSand]

Was it "insanity" when the nation started?

This is a nation of immigrants. What we have now is people that want to slam the door making the rules on immigration.

The process we now have in place is completely nuts.

And makes no sense whatsoever.

If you are rich you can buy your way into citizenship..but poor folks are barred?

That's nuts.

We understand you and people in the Democrat party want to import more poor people ... Everybody needs more poor people.
We cannot take care of those we have ... So we need to make sure we get some more.

.

 

[rightwinger]

.

I clearly am missing something when it comes to this topic. Here's what I'd like to see, someone please tell me why it's so terrible:

• If you're here, you get guest worker status. You can work and you pay our taxes.
• When you get guest worker status, you go to the back of the immigration line.
• Your kids have the same status.
• You work (kids go to school) while you're waiting your turn.
• When you reach the front of the line, you're in.

This seems so simple. What am I missing?

.

[MENTION=34298]Mac1958[/MENTION] makes some very solid and interesting points.

I want to tell you all two different small stories:

My mentor, with whom I apprenticed many, many years ago, is an arch-Conservative. He is a damned fine person with very, very strict Conservative beliefs. In terms of beliefs, he and I are like night and day.

Ca. 7 years ago, when then President Bush, Jr. tried to push immigration reform through, my mentor was visiting me, we met up not far from Vienna. Over a bottle of wine, as I asked him what he thought about this all, he, an arch-Conservative, said the following to me:

1.) It's a shitty situation, built on the backs of both parties.
2.) Illegal aliens have built a shadow economy that would better serve our economy were it to come into the open.
3.) Most illegal aliens do jobs that most Americans don't want to do.
4.) Most illegal aliens come from catholic backgrounds and tend to have a more Conservative worldview, at least at the onset.
5.) It would cost far more to root them all up and send them back than to find a way to incorporate them into the Union.
6.) If the GOP doesn't do it, one day there will be a DEM president and the DEMS will do it and then they will get the credit.

And those words came from the mouth of an arch conservative. 7 years ago. Pretty prophetic stuff.

Second story:

A man I worked with for a while, a guy who did administrative stuff, once told me that whenever he had to do some kind of disciplinary process on someone, it was always a matter of discerning between intent and perception. In other words, a person who may have screwed up badly may intend one thing, but it will be perceived in another way.

And so it is with the GOP. Do I think that most Republicans hate immigrants, esp. illegal immigrants? NO, I don't.

But there are just enough GOP freaks out there who have had access to a microphone or TV interview, who have said batshit crazy things about illegal immigrants - and let's be clear here: in almost every case they are talking about Latinos - and automatically linking LEGAL immigrants who are Latinos with illegal immigrants. And that is where the GOP shoots itself in the foot every day over this issue. Every single day.

So, even if many, many Republicans don't intend it, it sure as hell is being perceived that way. Mitt Romney was forced to shoot himself in the foot with the "self-deportation" thing in order to assuage the extreme-right of the GOP and those words came back to bite him squarely in the ass in the fall.

Now, back to you, Mac: I see no problem with your ideas. But be careful about the children part. Kids born here, irrespective of the nationality of their parents at that time, are US citizens.

[MENTION=28109]Amelia[/MENTION] makes the point - and correctly so imo, that, if we don't completely, hermetically seal the border (meaning, the Texas / Mexico border), then in 20 years, we will be right back where we are now. Please remember that the Obama administration has put more boots on the ground at the border than any other administration and the Obama adminstration has deported more illegal immigrants than any other, but that is not enough. We may have to build an electronic - and - physical fence, along the entire stretch, without exception.

My advice to the GOP would be to take part in this, for it is going to happen, anyway. If the GOP kills immigration reform once more, polling is already showing that the Latinos will simply give up on the GOP. There were already strong indications of this in 2012. Latinos really, really liked Bill Clinton. They are going to be crazy for Hillary, mark my word, and if she selects a Latino as her running mate, and I suspect she may just do that, then the sleeping bear that is the Latino vote will awaken.

What is not acceptable is the excuse on the part of GOPer that Latinos will never vote GOP and so, "fuck 'em". Really?

President George W. Bush, Jr, got 45% of the Latino vote. A real GOP outreach could possibly bring the GOP more, but the situation is absolutely hopeless for the GOP so long as it continues to demonize Latinos, plain and simple. Whether or not it is intended, it is being perceived so. And as long as you have assholes like Rep. King from Iowa talking about Latino drug-dealing teenagers with calves the size of melons or a total whackazoid like Tommy Tancredo calling for literacy tests for LEGAL immigrants to be able to vote whilst also saying that we should nuke Mecca, or Louis Gohmert babbling on and on and on about El Quaida getting in bed with Mexicans so as to smuggle over "anchor babies" who will then grow up to blow up our cities - as long as your team has these kind of absolutely batshit crazy nutz going around doing this kind of shit, the Latino community will never, ever trust you.

I also would like to know why Republicans are so damned defeatist about their chances at recruiting Latinos into the GOP. Were the Congress to adopt Obama's proposal from LAST YEAR, then that would mean at least 12 years would have to pass before the first illegal aliens would be naturalized, which means that they would probably first vote in the 2028 elections. Does anyone think that the GOP is SOOOO paralyzed that it cannot convince Latinos on the battlefield of ideas that maybe their party is better, when they would have about 14 years to get the job done? Really?

Had Republicans been that defeatist in 1980, then the Reagan Revolution would never have happened, for Reagan brought people into the GOP whom most GOPers thought would never sign-up.

So, those were my two cents.

[MENTION=20412]JakeStarkey[/MENTION] [MENTION=20321]rightwinger[/MENTION]

Is VOTING all you are thinking about in this matter ? What about ALL THIS >>

Harms of Immigration

1. Americans lose jobs. (especially Whites due to affirmative action).

2. Wage reduction.

3. Tax $ lost (due to off books work + lower wages paid).

4. Remittance $$$ lost. ($40 Billion year).

5. Tax $$ lost to immigrants on welfare.

6. Increased crime.

7. Increased traffic congestion.

8. Increased pollution.

9. Overcrowding in hospital ERs.

10. Overcrowding in recreational facilities.

11. Overcrowding in government offices.

12. Overcrowding in schools.

13. Decrease in funds available for entitlements.

14. Cultural erosion.

15. Overuse of scarce resources (oil, gasoline, fresh water, jobs, electricity, food, etc)

16. Introduction of foreign diseases.

Is there anthing in there that hasn't been said about every group of immgrants? Irish, Chinese, Polish, Italian.....

 

[rightwinger]

Was it "insanity" when the nation started?

This is a nation of immigrants. What we have now is people that want to slam the door making the rules on immigration.

The process we now have in place is completely nuts.

And makes no sense whatsoever.

If you are rich you can buy your way into citizenship..but poor folks are barred?

That's nuts.

We understand you and people in the Democrat party want to import more poor people ... Everybody needs more poor people.
We cannot take care of those we have ... So we need to make sure we get some more.

.

Those poor people are already here. Doing work and raising families

 

[Geaux4it]

Was it "insanity" when the nation started?

This is a nation of immigrants. What we have now is people that want to slam the door making the rules on immigration.

The process we now have in place is completely nuts.

And makes no sense whatsoever.

If you are rich you can buy your way into citizenship..but poor folks are barred?

That's nuts.

We understand you and people in the Democrat party want to import more poor people ... Everybody needs more poor people.
We cannot take care of those we have ... So we need to make sure we get some more.

.

Those poor people are already here. Doing work and raising families

That's fine. Easier for ICE to find them all in one spot.

Round em up and send them home then have them start over at the front door the right way

That's not to much to ask.

-Geaux

 

[rightwinger]

We understand you and people in the Democrat party want to import more poor people ... Everybody needs more poor people.
We cannot take care of those we have ... So we need to make sure we get some more.

.

Those poor people are already here. Doing work and raising families

That's fine. Easier for ICE to find them all in one spot.

Round em up and send them home then have them start over at the front door the right way

That's not to much to ask.

-Geaux

Herding cats

 

[BlackSand]

Was it "insanity" when the nation started?

This is a nation of immigrants. What we have now is people that want to slam the door making the rules on immigration.

The process we now have in place is completely nuts.

And makes no sense whatsoever.

If you are rich you can buy your way into citizenship..but poor folks are barred?

That's nuts.

We understand you and people in the Democrat party want to import more poor people ... Everybody needs more poor people.
We cannot take care of those we have ... So we need to make sure we get some more.

.

Those poor people are already here. Doing work and raising families

What does that have to do with wanting to import more and the fact we don't take care of the ones we have?
Well ... I mean what other than supplying votes for Democrats and Liberals do the two have in common?

Save your sales pitch for someone else.

.

 

[rightwinger]

We understand you and people in the Democrat party want to import more poor people ... Everybody needs more poor people.
We cannot take care of those we have ... So we need to make sure we get some more.

.

Those poor people are already here. Doing work and raising families

What does that have to do with wanting to import more and the fact we don't take care of the ones we have?
Well ... I mean what other than supplying votes for Democrats and Liberals do the two have in common?

Save your sales pitch for someone else.

.

It s you who keeps talking about importing more

I am talking about how Hispanic citizens refuse to vote Republican

 

[protectionist]

First of all, "securing our borders" is GOP double talk. Most illegal aliens walked right through the border patroled gate, with visa's which they just overstayed. All the drones and survielance equipment in the world isn't going to stop that.

Second, fining and punishing those that hire aliens is another piecie of GOP doubletalk. There is no such thing as an illegal alien, until a court of law has made that determination. You can fine and punish a company for hiring an undocumented worker, but only if he has not been given forged documentation that complies with those listed in the law that are good enough that a reasonable man would not know that they were false. I will be pleased to tell any poster here how to get legitament documented paperwork of a new identity, including a birth certificate, driver's license, and voter registration card...all issued by the legal authorities, for the sum of $1. It makes no difference to the GOP that more illegal aliens have been deported under the Obama administration than under any other admisistration. The whole issue is a smokescreen.

Not that I am complaining, however, The more the GOP villifies Hispanics...., well, you get the drift.

To call an illegal alien an "undocumented worker is about the equivalent of calling a bank robber an "informal withdrawl agent"

As for securing the border, the double fence, mandated by the 2006 Secure Fence Act, built across the ENTIRE Mexican border, with 5 rows on concertina wire on the American side, would be very effective at stopping border crashers. As for visa overstayers, just pass a law making that illegal. As for illegal employers violating IRCA, yes, they can only be held responsible for "knowingly" hiring illegals, BUT much can be done to assist them, such as mandatory E-Verify usage and a mandatory biometric ID system.

You are not so obtuse as to believe that there is such a thing in the legal world as a "bank robber" until a court of law convicts him as such. Until that date, he is an "alleged bank robber". There is no law against hiring an "alleged illegal alien".

1. As I duly noted in my post that you quoted, so what's your problem ?

2. However, if/whenever the "alleged" illegal alien is shown to BE an illegal alien, and it's shown that the employer could have and should have known this, then that employer can be held liable for having violated the IRCA, and will face consequences. From the employer's point of view, there has to always be some degree of risk in all this, and this all is something I personally would not be comfortable with. When you come right down to it, when prison and large fines are around the corner, don't get greedy.
And if you can't afford to function without cheap, foreign labor, you're not prepared to be in business in the first place. Stay out of it. Get a job.

3. Definition of "bank robber" >> One who robs a bank.

 

[BlackSand]

Those poor people are already here. Doing work and raising families

What does that have to do with wanting to import more and the fact we don't take care of the ones we have?
Well ... I mean what other than supplying votes for Democrats and Liberals do the two have in common?

Save your sales pitch for someone else.

.

It s you who keeps talking about importing more

I am talking about how Hispanic citizens refuse to vote Republican

No it isn't me ... It was in the post I commented on.

"This country was built by immigrants ... Blah-Blah-Blah ... Rich people can buy their way into citizenship ... but poor people are barred ... Blah-Blah-Blah."
Illegal immigrants don't buy their way into citizenship ... So that would be talking about people who aren't here buying their way in ... And those who cannot afford it being barred.

If you cannot read then that is not my problem.
The only people who want to buy anything are Liberals and Democrats like you ... And you want to buy votes with legislative policies.
Sell your bullshit elsewhere ... You lying liberal, snake oil selling, sack of excrement.

.

 

[protectionist]

[MENTION=34298]Mac1958[/MENTION] makes some very solid and interesting points.

I want to tell you all two different small stories:

My mentor, with whom I apprenticed many, many years ago, is an arch-Conservative. He is a damned fine person with very, very strict Conservative beliefs. In terms of beliefs, he and I are like night and day.

Ca. 7 years ago, when then President Bush, Jr. tried to push immigration reform through, my mentor was visiting me, we met up not far from Vienna. Over a bottle of wine, as I asked him what he thought about this all, he, an arch-Conservative, said the following to me:

1.) It's a shitty situation, built on the backs of both parties.
2.) Illegal aliens have built a shadow economy that would better serve our economy were it to come into the open.
3.) Most illegal aliens do jobs that most Americans don't want to do.
4.) Most illegal aliens come from catholic backgrounds and tend to have a more Conservative worldview, at least at the onset.
5.) It would cost far more to root them all up and send them back than to find a way to incorporate them into the Union.
6.) If the GOP doesn't do it, one day there will be a DEM president and the DEMS will do it and then they will get the credit.

And those words came from the mouth of an arch conservative. 7 years ago. Pretty prophetic stuff.

Second story:

A man I worked with for a while, a guy who did administrative stuff, once told me that whenever he had to do some kind of disciplinary process on someone, it was always a matter of discerning between intent and perception. In other words, a person who may have screwed up badly may intend one thing, but it will be perceived in another way.

And so it is with the GOP. Do I think that most Republicans hate immigrants, esp. illegal immigrants? NO, I don't.

But there are just enough GOP freaks out there who have had access to a microphone or TV interview, who have said batshit crazy things about illegal immigrants - and let's be clear here: in almost every case they are talking about Latinos - and automatically linking LEGAL immigrants who are Latinos with illegal immigrants. And that is where the GOP shoots itself in the foot every day over this issue. Every single day.

So, even if many, many Republicans don't intend it, it sure as hell is being perceived that way. Mitt Romney was forced to shoot himself in the foot with the "self-deportation" thing in order to assuage the extreme-right of the GOP and those words came back to bite him squarely in the ass in the fall.

Now, back to you, Mac: I see no problem with your ideas. But be careful about the children part. Kids born here, irrespective of the nationality of their parents at that time, are US citizens.

[MENTION=28109]Amelia[/MENTION] makes the point - and correctly so imo, that, if we don't completely, hermetically seal the border (meaning, the Texas / Mexico border), then in 20 years, we will be right back where we are now. Please remember that the Obama administration has put more boots on the ground at the border than any other administration and the Obama adminstration has deported more illegal immigrants than any other, but that is not enough. We may have to build an electronic - and - physical fence, along the entire stretch, without exception.

My advice to the GOP would be to take part in this, for it is going to happen, anyway. If the GOP kills immigration reform once more, polling is already showing that the Latinos will simply give up on the GOP. There were already strong indications of this in 2012. Latinos really, really liked Bill Clinton. They are going to be crazy for Hillary, mark my word, and if she selects a Latino as her running mate, and I suspect she may just do that, then the sleeping bear that is the Latino vote will awaken.

What is not acceptable is the excuse on the part of GOPer that Latinos will never vote GOP and so, "fuck 'em". Really?

President George W. Bush, Jr, got 45% of the Latino vote. A real GOP outreach could possibly bring the GOP more, but the situation is absolutely hopeless for the GOP so long as it continues to demonize Latinos, plain and simple. Whether or not it is intended, it is being perceived so. And as long as you have assholes like Rep. King from Iowa talking about Latino drug-dealing teenagers with calves the size of melons or a total whackazoid like Tommy Tancredo calling for literacy tests for LEGAL immigrants to be able to vote whilst also saying that we should nuke Mecca, or Louis Gohmert babbling on and on and on about El Quaida getting in bed with Mexicans so as to smuggle over "anchor babies" who will then grow up to blow up our cities - as long as your team has these kind of absolutely batshit crazy nutz going around doing this kind of shit, the Latino community will never, ever trust you.

I also would like to know why Republicans are so damned defeatist about their chances at recruiting Latinos into the GOP. Were the Congress to adopt Obama's proposal from LAST YEAR, then that would mean at least 12 years would have to pass before the first illegal aliens would be naturalized, which means that they would probably first vote in the 2028 elections. Does anyone think that the GOP is SOOOO paralyzed that it cannot convince Latinos on the battlefield of ideas that maybe their party is better, when they would have about 14 years to get the job done? Really?

Had Republicans been that defeatist in 1980, then the Reagan Revolution would never have happened, for Reagan brought people into the GOP whom most GOPers thought would never sign-up.

So, those were my two cents.

[MENTION=20412]JakeStarkey[/MENTION] [MENTION=20321]rightwinger[/MENTION]

Is VOTING all you are thinking about in this matter ? What about ALL THIS >>

Harms of Immigration

1. Americans lose jobs. (especially Whites due to affirmative action).

2. Wage reduction.

3. Tax $ lost (due to off books work + lower wages paid).

4. Remittance $$$ lost. ($40 Billion year).

5. Tax $$ lost to immigrants on welfare.

6. Increased crime.

7. Increased traffic congestion.

8. Increased pollution.

9. Overcrowding in hospital ERs.

10. Overcrowding in recreational facilities.

11. Overcrowding in government offices.

12. Overcrowding in schools.

13. Decrease in funds available for entitlements.

14. Cultural erosion.

15. Overuse of scarce resources (oil, gasoline, fresh water, jobs, electricity, food, etc)

16. Introduction of foreign diseases.

Is there anthing in there that hasn't been said about every group of immgrants? Irish, Chinese, Polish, Italian.....

You think I care which immigrants are coming here ? In my book, an immigrant is an immigrant. Period.

 

[protectionist]

First of all, "securing our borders" is GOP double talk. Most illegal aliens walked right through the border patroled gate, with visa's which they just overstayed. All the drones and survielance equipment in the world isn't going to stop that.

Second, fining and punishing those that hire aliens is another piecie of GOP doubletalk. There is no such thing as an illegal alien, until a court of law has made that determination. You can fine and punish a company for hiring an undocumented worker, but only if he has not been given forged documentation that complies with those listed in the law that are good enough that a reasonable man would not know that they were false. I will be pleased to tell any poster here how to get legitament documented paperwork of a new identity, including a birth certificate, driver's license, and voter registration card...all issued by the legal authorities, for the sum of $1. It makes no difference to the GOP that more illegal aliens have been deported under the Obama administration than under any other admisistration. The whole issue is a smokescreen.

Not that I am complaining, however, The more the GOP villifies Hispanics...., well, you get the drift.

I get the drift that you didn't read your own post. How can you say there is no such thing as an illegal alien after you wrote about most "illegal aliens" walking through the border patrolled gate. Which is pure nonsense by the way.
As for the rest of the post, I would agree that I didn't go into details. I simply stated a very general idea of what should be happening. I can post how I think it SHOULD happen but I think the previous post is a pretty good start on how we fix a broken system. Plus it's dinner time and I'm making some tacos. No irony intended.

I stand corrected. not "Most" illegal aliens mearly overstayed their visa. Only 40% of them.

John Carter claim that 40 percent of nation's illegal residents came by plane and overstayed visas draws on 2006 estimate | PolitiFact Texas

I live 35 miles from the border. of the other 60%, about half, or more, come through hidden on trucks and busses and trains. Good luck with stopping that with a fence and drones.

As it is with most problems , they need to be handled in a variety of ways to guard against a variety of situations. The fence is part of that. So is the transportation factor, birthright citizenship, sanctuary cities, the overstaying of visas (which ought to be eliminated almost entirely), and the practice of US politicians sucking up to vested interest bribers, instead of doing what's best for America, as they're supposed to.

Lastly, there is the necessity of dealing with Mexico, who is nothing less than an enemy invader that needs a US president to stand up to them. President James K. Polk, wish you were here now Mr. President. You too, Ike.

http://images-cdn.lancasteronline.com/23357_640.jpg

 

[protectionist]

All republicans need to is provide a reason to vote for them.....should be easy

Sure. They could give them the same reason the Democrats do, i.e. a ton of empty promises of what big government is going to do for them, give to them, arrange for them. The fact that such promises are always dangled juuuuuuuuust out of reach doesn't phase those who are thrown a bone now and then to keep them quiet. And hopeful for more.

But let's say the GOP does that. What does that accomplish other than a one party system populated by professional politicians and bureaucrats who don't really give a damn about anybody so long as they can fool the people long enough to acquire their power, prestige, influence, and massive personal wealth.

Obama has managed to push the gimme sector over the 50% mark during the last 5 years. More than 50% of the population now receives at least some kind of benefit from the federal government whether it is their total support or food stamps or a cell phone. It is very difficult for folks to give up even a meager and/or essentially meaningless benefit once they have it when there is no assurance that it will be replaced with something better in the private sector.

So the Democrats herd more and more hapless government addicts onto the plantation and solidify their power despite growing discontent as promise after promise is broken. But the politicans and bureaucrats don't care. They'll have theirs and will be long gone before it all hits the fan.

And we want the Republicans to do that too just to get into office? Why? Why not just disband them and be honest that we would then be the one-party system that would result?

Fine Republicans....don't want to get the Hispanic vote through big government? Go for it

Show Hispanics the wonder of free market capitalism and funnel jobs into their neighborhoods. They will vote Republucan forever

What is stopping you?

Republicans can show Hispanics lots of thing that Hispanics value highly, without mentioning a word about free market capitalism. They can show how those Hispanics, like any other Americans should be from all the harms of immigration (any immigration from anywhere). They show a greater respect for the family unit and marriage as being between a man and a woman. They can show more emphasis on punishment for criminals, like the death penalty, whenever applicable. They can show a better and stronger resistance to Islamization, a threat to Christianity (most Hispanics are Catholics). They can show a better resistance to Muslim terrorism.

Harms of Immigration

1. Americans lose jobs. (especially Whites due to affirmative action).

2. Wage reduction.

3. Tax $ lost (due to off books work + lower wages paid).

4. Remittance $$$ lost. ($40 Billion year).

5. Tax $$ lost to immigrants on welfare.

6. Increased crime.

7. Increased traffic congestion.

8. Increased pollution.

9. Overcrowding in hospital ERs.

10. Overcrowding in recreational facilities.

11. Overcrowding in government offices.

12. Overcrowding in schools.

13. Decrease in funds available for entitlements.

14. Cultural erosion.

15. Overuse of scarce resources (oil, gasoline, fresh water, jobs, electricity, food, etc)

16. Introduction of foreign diseases.

 

[rightwinger]

Is VOTING all you are thinking about in this matter ? What about ALL THIS >>

Harms of Immigration

1. Americans lose jobs. (especially Whites due to affirmative action).

2. Wage reduction.

3. Tax $ lost (due to off books work + lower wages paid).

4. Remittance $$$ lost. ($40 Billion year).

5. Tax $$ lost to immigrants on welfare.

6. Increased crime.

7. Increased traffic congestion.

8. Increased pollution.

9. Overcrowding in hospital ERs.

10. Overcrowding in recreational facilities.

11. Overcrowding in government offices.

12. Overcrowding in schools.

13. Decrease in funds available for entitlements.

14. Cultural erosion.

15. Overuse of scarce resources (oil, gasoline, fresh water, jobs, electricity, food, etc)

16. Introduction of foreign diseases.

Is there anthing in there that hasn't been said about every group of immgrants? Irish, Chinese, Polish, Italian.....

You think I care which immigrants are coming here ? In my book, an immigrant is an immigrant. Period.

Native Americans said the same thing

 

[protectionist]

Those poor people are already here. Doing work and raising families

What does that have to do with wanting to import more and the fact we don't take care of the ones we have?
Well ... I mean what other than supplying votes for Democrats and Liberals do the two have in common?

Save your sales pitch for someone else.

.

It s you who keeps talking about importing more

I am talking about how Hispanic citizens refuse to vote Republican

The Hispanic vote is overrated. It is only 9% of the total national vote And less than that in most states elections. Hispanics also vote less than whites and blacks. Only 52% of Hispanics vote compared to 66% of whites, and 65% of blacks.

Lastly, the common opinion is that the Hispanic vote for Democrats is increasing. Actually, over the past 8 years, it has been Decreasing. 69% in 2006. 67% in 2008. 60% in 2010. Over the same time, the Hispanic vote for Republicans has been on the INcrease. 30% to 31% to 38%.

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

 

[protectionist]

Is there anthing in there that hasn't been said about every group of immgrants? Irish, Chinese, Polish, Italian.....

You think I care which immigrants are coming here ? In my book, an immigrant is an immigrant. Period.

Native Americans said the same thing

You mean American Indians. Anyone born in America is a "Native American".

 

[Vandalshandle]

To call an illegal alien an "undocumented worker is about the equivalent of calling a bank robber an "informal withdrawl agent"

As for securing the border, the double fence, mandated by the 2006 Secure Fence Act, built across the ENTIRE Mexican border, with 5 rows on concertina wire on the American side, would be very effective at stopping border crashers. As for visa overstayers, just pass a law making that illegal. As for illegal employers violating IRCA, yes, they can only be held responsible for "knowingly" hiring illegals, BUT much can be done to assist them, such as mandatory E-Verify usage and a mandatory biometric ID system.

You are not so obtuse as to believe that there is such a thing in the legal world as a "bank robber" until a court of law convicts him as such. Until that date, he is an "alleged bank robber". There is no law against hiring an "alleged illegal alien".

1. As I duly noted in my post that you quoted, so what's your problem ?

2. However, if/whenever the "alleged" illegal alien is shown to BE an illegal alien, and it's shown that the employer could have and should have known this, then that employer can be held liable for having violated the IRCA, and will face consequences. From the employer's point of view, there has to always be some degree of risk in all this, and this all is something I personally would not be comfortable with. When you come right down to it, when prison and large fines are around the corner, don't get greedy.
And if you can't afford to function without cheap, foreign labor, you're not prepared to be in business in the first place. Stay out of it. Get a job.

3. Definition of "bank robber" >> One who robs a bank.

Tell ya what, Protect. Go into a court of law, and call the denfendent charged, but not convicted, of bank robbery a "bank robber", and count the seconds before his attorney objects, and the judge sustains.... I take back my doubt that you are not so obtuse as to understand that. Obviously, you are.

 

[Amelia]

You are not so obtuse as to believe that there is such a thing in the legal world as a "bank robber" until a court of law convicts him as such. Until that date, he is an "alleged bank robber". There is no law against hiring an "alleged illegal alien".

1. As I duly noted in my post that you quoted, so what's your problem ?

2. However, if/whenever the "alleged" illegal alien is shown to BE an illegal alien, and it's shown that the employer could have and should have known this, then that employer can be held liable for having violated the IRCA, and will face consequences. From the employer's point of view, there has to always be some degree of risk in all this, and this all is something I personally would not be comfortable with. When you come right down to it, when prison and large fines are around the corner, don't get greedy.
And if you can't afford to function without cheap, foreign labor, you're not prepared to be in business in the first place. Stay out of it. Get a job.

3. Definition of "bank robber" >> One who robs a bank.

Tell ya what, Protect. Go into a court of law, and call the denfendent charged, but not convicted, of bank robbery a "bank robber", and count the seconds before his attorney objects, and the judge sustains.... I take back my doubt that you are not so obtuse as to understand that. Obviously, you are.

The robber is not in Schrodinger's box.

An unconvicted robber is still a robber.

Someone who is in this country in violation of our laws is an illegal alien. Getting caught or convicted is not what makes someone's presence here illegal.

 

[protectionist]

You are not so obtuse as to believe that there is such a thing in the legal world as a "bank robber" until a court of law convicts him as such. Until that date, he is an "alleged bank robber". There is no law against hiring an "alleged illegal alien".

1. As I duly noted in my post that you quoted, so what's your problem ?

2. However, if/whenever the "alleged" illegal alien is shown to BE an illegal alien, and it's shown that the employer could have and should have known this, then that employer can be held liable for having violated the IRCA, and will face consequences. From the employer's point of view, there has to always be some degree of risk in all this, and this all is something I personally would not be comfortable with. When you come right down to it, when prison and large fines are around the corner, don't get greedy.
And if you can't afford to function without cheap, foreign labor, you're not prepared to be in business in the first place. Stay out of it. Get a job.

3. Definition of "bank robber" >> One who robs a bank.

Tell ya what, Protect. Go into a court of law, and call the defendent charged, but not convicted, of bank robbery a "bank robber", and count the seconds before his attorney objects, and the judge sustains.... I take back my doubt that you are not so obtuse as to understand that. Obviously, you are.

You may tell me anything you like, but a bank robber is > One who robs a bank.

Just curious though. Suppose someone robbed a bank and was tried and convicted of it. Would you say on the date that he robbed that bank that he wasn't a bank robber ? That's OK you don't have to answer. He was a bank robber because he robbed the bank , even if he got away and wasn't even arrested. You may come back down to earth now. Your little ploy didn't fly.

 

[Vandalshandle]

1. As I duly noted in my post that you quoted, so what's your problem ?

2. However, if/whenever the "alleged" illegal alien is shown to BE an illegal alien, and it's shown that the employer could have and should have known this, then that employer can be held liable for having violated the IRCA, and will face consequences. From the employer's point of view, there has to always be some degree of risk in all this, and this all is something I personally would not be comfortable with. When you come right down to it, when prison and large fines are around the corner, don't get greedy.
And if you can't afford to function without cheap, foreign labor, you're not prepared to be in business in the first place. Stay out of it. Get a job.

3. Definition of "bank robber" >> One who robs a bank.

Tell ya what, Protect. Go into a court of law, and call the defendent charged, but not convicted, of bank robbery a "bank robber", and count the seconds before his attorney objects, and the judge sustains.... I take back my doubt that you are not so obtuse as to understand that. Obviously, you are.

You may tell me anything you like, but a bank robber is > One who robs a bank.

Just curious though. Suppose someone robbed a bank and was tried and convicted of it. Would you say on the date that he robbed that bank that he wasn't a bank robber ? That's OK you don't have to answer. He was a bank robber because he robbed the bank , even if he got away and wasn't even arrested. You may come back down to earth now. Your little ploy didn't fly.

To parapharase a line in the 1972 movie, "Paper Chase", "Here is a dime, Protect. Use it to call your mother and tell her that there is very little chance of you graduating from Law school".

 

[protectionist]

Tell ya what, Protect. Go into a court of law, and call the defendent charged, but not convicted, of bank robbery a "bank robber", and count the seconds before his attorney objects, and the judge sustains.... I take back my doubt that you are not so obtuse as to understand that. Obviously, you are.

You may tell me anything you like, but a bank robber is > One who robs a bank.

Just curious though. Suppose someone robbed a bank and was tried and convicted of it. Would you say on the date that he robbed that bank that he wasn't a bank robber ? That's OK you don't have to answer. He was a bank robber because he robbed the bank , even if he got away and wasn't even arrested. You may come back down to earth now. Your little ploy didn't fly.

To parapharase a line in the 1972 movie, "Paper Chase", "Here is a dime, Protect. Use it to call your mother and tell her that there is very little chance of you graduating from Law school".

In case it hasn't dawned on you yet (and apparently not), as Amelia and I have both pointed out to you, everything isn't confined into a box of legal/illegal. What is illegal is illegal regardless of any official legal action. If I play the guitar, I play the guitar. That fact doesn't need a legal proclamation to support it. If a boy catches a fish, he has caught that fish and he is a fisherman. No law school study necessary. And if a bank robber robs a bank, whether he's caught or not, he still is a bank robber, and he still robbed that bank. Get it ?

I don't need to go to law school, and you do seem to need a special school. One that can teach you how to think.

As for calling my mother, she is deceased, and if you had an ounce of decency, you wouldn't be injecting someone's mother into the discussion in the first place.