Are you in favor of Obama's new Amnesty/Voter register program?

[Foxfyre]

Operation ******* seemed to have worked halfway decent.


Handbook of Texas Online - OPERATION *******


And I believe the majority of todays Americans won't give a damn about something that "looks" like a Police state. We are smart enough to know the difference.

Some of it was beneficial both for Americans and the Mexican workers. But much of it really wasn't. The treatment of the Mexican people by Americans in the southern states in the 40's and 50's was unconscionable and indefensible. The illegals here now are treated royally by comparison.

Beyond that fact and from a more practical point of view, the USA population in 1950 was about half what it is now and far less of the farm and ranchland was automated as it is now. The illegal Mexcan workers then were actually needed and weren't displacing that many American workers.

These days they do. Now more than 50 years later, our population has doubled and different dynamics apply.

It's sort of like comparing the original USA immigration policies with those necessary after the vast empty areas of America started filling up and there was less and less land, and therefore less work for the newcomers. When we reached the tipping point where too many new immigrants could no longer be assimilated into the existing American culture, it was necessary to establish quotas.

Each era has its own set of problems to deal with. Certain principles and values from the beginning are as valid today as they have ever been. But the issues of jobs, population densities, and other components of our culture do change over the years and bring their own challenges.

 

[Vel]

A majority to do what? As has been stated, we already have laws on the books against hiring illegal aliens. If we choose to enforce our laws, we already have the means so what is it exactly that we need a majority on?

We have the majority as well as the laws already on the books. According to that recent Quinnipac poll, two thirds of Americans now want us to enforce the laws already on the books before doing anything about immigration reform. Fewer than 30% of Americans polled want the government to grant amnesty to illegals.

Foxfyre is deliberately misinterpreting the poll, so I suggest you all go look at it yourself.

Go ahead and postthe link, FF.

While we're waiting, would you address what we need a majority for? If we want to enforce our labor laws, we have all the tools at our disposal already. Surely you're not intimating that Obama is not enforcing our laws in order to gain amnesty for all those "undocumented democrats" are you?

 

[Intense]

I propose a new Income Tax on All Federal Workers. 25% across the board, give backs on Pensions and Medical Benefits, to atone for their sin's, disbanding of all Government union's, for a start. The money will be used to perform Constitutional function's, such as Immigration and Border control, more competently by private sub contractor's, open bidding for those that pass the Idiot test. No Federal workers need apply. We can no longer can afford you.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

A majority to do what? As has been stated, we already have laws on the books against hiring illegal aliens. If we choose to enforce our laws, we already have the means so what is it exactly that we need a majority on?

We have the majority as well as the laws already on the books. According to that recent Quinnipac poll, two thirds of Americans now want us to enforce the laws already on the books before doing anything about immigration reform. Fewer than 30% of Americans polled want the government to grant amnesty to illegals.

Foxfyre is deliberately misinterpreting the poll, so I suggest you all go look at it yourself.

Go ahead and postthe link, FF.

Jake likes to claim someone misinterpets things and will call you a liar until you call his bluff.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We have the majority as well as the laws already on the books. According to that recent Quinnipac poll, two thirds of Americans now want us to enforce the laws already on the books before doing anything about immigration reform. Fewer than 30% of Americans polled want the government to grant amnesty to illegals.

Foxfyre is deliberately misinterpreting the poll, so I suggest you all go look at it yourself.

Go ahead and postthe link, FF.

Jake likes to claim someone misinterpets things and will call you a liar until you call his bluff.

Let her post her link, then call my bluff. You have done it before and got hit by the kickback when you appeared the fool.

Simply, the far right "free market forces" fools have nothing.

 

[Foxfyre]

We have the majority as well as the laws already on the books. According to that recent Quinnipac poll, two thirds of Americans now want us to enforce the laws already on the books before doing anything about immigration reform. Fewer than 30% of Americans polled want the government to grant amnesty to illegals.

Foxfyre is deliberately misinterpreting the poll, so I suggest you all go look at it yourself.

Go ahead and postthe link, FF.

Jake likes to claim someone misinterpets things and will call you a liar until you call his bluff.

Does he? I don't read all that many of his posts because it is just too frustrating and annoying. But of course if he was confident he has a clue what he is talking about, he would have already pulled up that June 2010 Quinnipiac poll and posted the evidence. Since he hasn't done that, it's pretty safe to conclude he doesn't have a clue what the poll was even about, much less what it shows.

 

[hortysir]

That is one view that many accept. However, many more disagree with it, and they have the votes. This is not about morality, it is about political possibility.

i want a link that the majority favor amnesty...

i've yet to see that anywhere

Your problem, sonny. But you can go read and study, which clearly reveals that you are in the minority. Where the Public Stands on Immigration Reform - Pew Research Center You don't have the votes, you will never have the votes, to block this.

From your own link, LIAR:

There is a difference between a 'path to citizenship' and "amnesty".
Did you think people would take your word that the link proved your lie?

 

[Vel]

i want a link that the majority favor amnesty...

i've yet to see that anywhere

Your problem, sonny. But you can go read and study, which clearly reveals that you are in the minority. Where the Public Stands on Immigration Reform - Pew Research Center You don't have the votes, you will never have the votes, to block this.

From your own link, LIAR:

There is a difference between a 'path to citizenship' and "amnesty".
Did you think people would take your word that the link proved your lie?

Is this debate over a three year old poll? Really?

 

[hortysir]

Your problem, sonny. But you can go read and study, which clearly reveals that you are in the minority. Where the Public Stands on Immigration Reform - Pew Research Center You don't have the votes, you will never have the votes, to block this.

From your own link, LIAR:

There is a difference between a 'path to citizenship' and "amnesty".
Did you think people would take your word that the link proved your lie?

Is this debate over a three year old poll? Really?

I'm sure, given recent developments, that number has grown

 

[Foxfyre]

From your own link, LIAR:

There is a difference between a 'path to citizenship' and "amnesty".
Did you think people would take your word that the link proved your lie?

Is this debate over a three year old poll? Really?

I'm sure, given recent developments, that number has grown

Yes three years makes a huge difference in public opinion, especially after they've witnessed up close and personal some really bad government policy.

Here's the link to the Quinnipiac poll though, completed just over a month ago. Too much information there to post, but it is quite revealing:

Search Results Poll * June 1, 2010 * More U.S. Voters Want Arizona- - Quinnipiac University – Hamden, Connecticut

 

[JakeStarkey]

i want a link that the majority favor amnesty...

i've yet to see that anywhere

Your problem, sonny. But you can go read and study, which clearly reveals that you are in the minority. Where the Public Stands on Immigration Reform - Pew Research Center You don't have the votes, you will never have the votes, to block this.

From your own link, LIAR:

There is a difference between a 'path to citizenship' and "amnesty".
Did you think people would take your word that the link proved your lie?

Let folks read ALL of the link and come to an honest objective conclusion.

Foxfyre nitpicked and that is not honest. You nitpicked and that is not honest.

Gotta do better, folks.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Foxfyre is deliberately misinterpreting the poll, so I suggest you all go look at it yourself.

Go ahead and postthe link, FF.

Jake likes to claim someone misinterpets things and will call you a liar until you call his bluff.

Let her post her link, then call my bluff. You have done it before and got hit by the kickback when you appeared the fool.

Simply, the far right "free market forces" fools have nothing.

Really I got kicked by from what? really come on jake tell me about the time I got kicked bac? Come on

 

[JakeStarkey]

Jake likes to claim someone misinterpets things and will call you a liar until you call his bluff.

Let her post her link, then call my bluff. You have done it before and got hit by the kickback when you appeared the fool.

Simply, the far right "free market forces" fools have nothing.

Really I got kicked by from what? really come on jake tell me about the time I got kicked bac? Come on

Similar to the fool who said, "What", with blood all over his face. Denial is the first step of the idiot. You have matched the first step. Congrats.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Amnesty Pushers Concoct Six Straw Men
by Rep. Lamar Smith

It’s an old device in politics: Set up a straw man to criticize when you can’t win an argument on your own. Such tactics, unfortunately, are standard fare when it comes to efforts by a handful of special interest groups to bring about amnesty for illegal immigrants.

Organizations such as the National Council of La Raza, the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) and the Migration Policy Institute know that most Americans disagree with their desire for amnesty. Most Americans want to see immigration laws enforced. So these groups create straw men. They use them as diversionary tactics to criticize the way in which immigration laws are enforced without ever admitting to their true amnesty goals.

Who are these Straw Men? Let’s take a look:




1. The Civil Rights Abuses Straw Man

2. The Strained Resources Straw Man

3. The Serious Criminals Straw Man

4. The Family Separation Straw Man

5. The Detention Straw Man

6. The Flawed Verification System Straw Man

Amnesty Pushers Concoct Six Straw Men - HUMAN EVENTS

 

[Flopper]

We have laws right now to crack down on the hiring of illegal aliens and our government refuses to enforce them and what good does it do to deport criminal aliens if we don't bother to secure the border? There is no need to assimilate the remainder of aliens because if we start enforcing our employment laws and quit allowing people to overwhelm of social programs in the guise of "the children", then they will pack up and go home. We do not allow car thieves to keep the stolen cars. We don't allow bank robbers to keep the money. We shouldn't allow border jumpers a place at the front of the line. If immigration to the U.S. is difficult then perhaps these people can put some effort into turning their nation into a decent place to raise their families.

Currently it is very difficult for employers to check the citizenship of employees.
In order to make it much harder for illegal immigrants to find work Congress needs to do two things: first, we must accept that there is a need for a national ID card that is based on biometrics and cannot be copied; second, we must change the fines that businesses have to pay when they hire illegal immigrants so that the penalties will deter even the biggest of businesses from hiring illegal immigrants. To accomplish this goal we cannot pass legislation that simply increases the fine; instead, we must make the fine dependent on the financial wherewithal of individual businesses. Simply put, a business should have to pay a fine equal to one percent of last year’s earnings for each illegal immigrant it hires. Under this system, every business would have a tremendous incentive to make absolutely sure they are not hiring illegal immigrants. If an individual landscaper hires an illegal immigrant they will have to pay a fine of thousands of dollars. If Wall mart hirers an illegal immigrant their fine will be in the millions of dollars. Either way, each business will know that if they hire someone without a government ID they will run the risk of paying a harsh penalty.

Or how about this.. let's just bust a few business that we know are hiring illegal aliens. I'd bet that other businesses would get the hint. Let's have our federal government NOT suing our states for trying to figure out who is who. Let's try that. Let's try letting Social Security mail out no match letters to businesses so that they have an idea who on their staff is legal and who is working under fraudulent papers. Let's ENFORCE the current laws.

Unfortunately, illegal alien is not tattooed on their forehead. All a business can do is ask for a social security card or another form of id which can usually be forged very easily. Most migrant workers don't have much in the way of identification. I agree we should bust business that hire illegals, but let's first give them a way to determine who is legal.

 

[Charles_Main]

Currently it is very difficult for employers to check the citizenship of employees.
In order to make it much harder for illegal immigrants to find work Congress needs to do two things: first, we must accept that there is a need for a national ID card that is based on biometrics and cannot be copied; second, we must change the fines that businesses have to pay when they hire illegal immigrants so that the penalties will deter even the biggest of businesses from hiring illegal immigrants. To accomplish this goal we cannot pass legislation that simply increases the fine; instead, we must make the fine dependent on the financial wherewithal of individual businesses. Simply put, a business should have to pay a fine equal to one percent of last year’s earnings for each illegal immigrant it hires. Under this system, every business would have a tremendous incentive to make absolutely sure they are not hiring illegal immigrants. If an individual landscaper hires an illegal immigrant they will have to pay a fine of thousands of dollars. If Wall mart hirers an illegal immigrant their fine will be in the millions of dollars. Either way, each business will know that if they hire someone without a government ID they will run the risk of paying a harsh penalty.

Or how about this.. let's just bust a few business that we know are hiring illegal aliens. I'd bet that other businesses would get the hint. Let's have our federal government NOT suing our states for trying to figure out who is who. Let's try that. Let's try letting Social Security mail out no match letters to businesses so that they have an idea who on their staff is legal and who is working under fraudulent papers. Let's ENFORCE the current laws.

Unfortunately, illegal alien is not tattooed on their forehead. All a business can do is ask for a social security card or another form of id which can usually be forged very easily. Most migrant workers don't have much in the way of identification. I agree we should bust business that hire illegals, but let's first give them a way to determine who is legal.

Why don't we stop pretending that profiling is such a bad thing. We do not have a massive problem with Asian, or Arab Illegal immigrants. The problem is with Hispanic Illegal immigrants. Why in gods name is it so wrong to Profile and check those people when the problem is so bad. The ones here legally should have no issues with providing proof they are. The Idea that we can't do it because we may insult a few people who are here legally simply by asking them to prove that. Is total BS. Racial Profiling is not Racism when what you are doing is trying to stop and find illegal immigrants from one group of people. It is common sense.

Juts as it is common sense to profile Arabs, and Muslims when screening for Terrorist. Considering the Vast Majority of terrorist attacks in recent history has been carried out by them. It PCness gone wild to claim it is racist to concentrate on Hispanics when trying to root out Illegal immigrants. It is just logical. Sure there are people here illegally from other places, But the VAST majority of them are Hispanic, and for sure the steady flow of them walking across our southern border are.

 

[Vel]

Currently it is very difficult for employers to check the citizenship of employees.
In order to make it much harder for illegal immigrants to find work Congress needs to do two things: first, we must accept that there is a need for a national ID card that is based on biometrics and cannot be copied; second, we must change the fines that businesses have to pay when they hire illegal immigrants so that the penalties will deter even the biggest of businesses from hiring illegal immigrants. To accomplish this goal we cannot pass legislation that simply increases the fine; instead, we must make the fine dependent on the financial wherewithal of individual businesses. Simply put, a business should have to pay a fine equal to one percent of last year’s earnings for each illegal immigrant it hires. Under this system, every business would have a tremendous incentive to make absolutely sure they are not hiring illegal immigrants. If an individual landscaper hires an illegal immigrant they will have to pay a fine of thousands of dollars. If Wall mart hirers an illegal immigrant their fine will be in the millions of dollars. Either way, each business will know that if they hire someone without a government ID they will run the risk of paying a harsh penalty.

Or how about this.. let's just bust a few business that we know are hiring illegal aliens. I'd bet that other businesses would get the hint. Let's have our federal government NOT suing our states for trying to figure out who is who. Let's try that. Let's try letting Social Security mail out no match letters to businesses so that they have an idea who on their staff is legal and who is working under fraudulent papers. Let's ENFORCE the current laws.

Unfortunately, illegal alien is not tattooed on their forehead. All a business can do is ask for a social security card or another form of id which can usually be forged very easily. Most migrant workers don't have much in the way of identification. I agree we should bust business that hire illegals, but let's first give them a way to determine who is legal.

Do you think that the Social Security administration can't tell a bogus number from a good one? Let's start our enforcement there.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Let's start with a mandatory ID card. Many conservatives and faux Republicans wouldn't support the idea during Bush's years, but some do now. So that is a place to start.

 

[SFC Ollie]

I have always been in favor of a National Issued ID. One which could not be copied or counterfeited. hell I've carried a Federal issued ID my entire adult life. Last election day I showed it at the polls and was asked if I had a drivers license instead. I told them to mark it down as an authorized Picture ID. Idiots.

 

[Foxfyre]

Currently it is very difficult for employers to check the citizenship of employees.
In order to make it much harder for illegal immigrants to find work Congress needs to do two things: first, we must accept that there is a need for a national ID card that is based on biometrics and cannot be copied; second, we must change the fines that businesses have to pay when they hire illegal immigrants so that the penalties will deter even the biggest of businesses from hiring illegal immigrants. To accomplish this goal we cannot pass legislation that simply increases the fine; instead, we must make the fine dependent on the financial wherewithal of individual businesses. Simply put, a business should have to pay a fine equal to one percent of last year’s earnings for each illegal immigrant it hires. Under this system, every business would have a tremendous incentive to make absolutely sure they are not hiring illegal immigrants. If an individual landscaper hires an illegal immigrant they will have to pay a fine of thousands of dollars. If Wall mart hirers an illegal immigrant their fine will be in the millions of dollars. Either way, each business will know that if they hire someone without a government ID they will run the risk of paying a harsh penalty.

Or how about this.. let's just bust a few business that we know are hiring illegal aliens. I'd bet that other businesses would get the hint. Let's have our federal government NOT suing our states for trying to figure out who is who. Let's try that. Let's try letting Social Security mail out no match letters to businesses so that they have an idea who on their staff is legal and who is working under fraudulent papers. Let's ENFORCE the current laws.

Unfortunately, illegal alien is not tattooed on their forehead. All a business can do is ask for a social security card or another form of id which can usually be forged very easily. Most migrant workers don't have much in the way of identification. I agree we should bust business that hire illegals, but let's first give them a way to determine who is legal.

This is true. During the Carter Administration and again in the Reagan Administration, the government tried to enforce the law against hiring illegals. We had to obtain three positive forms of ID, one of which needed to be a verification of the person's home addresss, i.e. a utility bill or something. It was a royal pain too, especially when I needed an instructor or lifeguard at the last minute, had somebody qualified ready to step in, and they didn't have enough ID with them. So I, just like everybody else in such circumstances, cheated and let the new hire bring in the necessary documentation later. And after awhile everybody got more and more lax until nobody was bothering any more.

But then the government wasn't really enforcing the policy either so we could be as lax as we wanted and it didn't matter.

But when we were enforcing the policy, a new booming cottage industry producing phony IDs sprang up immediately. That wasn't so much a problem in our small north central Kansas community--I had 70 to 80 employees on the payroll at all times and only got stung once--but was more so a problem in some of the larger Kansas cities and very much a problem elsewhere.

Nowadays, here in Albuquerque, all the illegals are using multiple and usually phony social security numbers, phony addresses, phony references, and multiple aliases. And a lot of employers are hiring them quite unintentionally, but that problem really is minimal. The worse problem are those employers who are hiring them on purpose and actually prefer hiring them because illegals don't dare formally complain about much of anything.

A national ID card wouldn't be foolproof any more than our money has foiled all the counterfeiters. I would prefer encrypted drivers' licenses or other photo ID furnished by the State, with social security numbers verified if not actually printed on the those documents, before the ID could be issued.

Got tickled at Ollie not being able to use his Federal ID card though. I needed ID to pick up a narcotic prescription for a family member and the pharmacy wouldn't take my passport as positive ID.