Bad Immigration idea.

[RetiredGySgt]

I have to post this, even though not feeling well ).

I am all for stopping illegal immigration. For securing our borders and kicking out illegal aliens. BUT this is not a good plan. America is a nation of immigrants. We should NEVER lose that, this goes a long way to destroying that. The excuse that a "nuclear" family is important but other family members aren't is bullshit. I can not believe Republicans support this concept.

For those unaware, on Immigration I do NOT see any political party that cares about the real issues, both parties want it to continue.... But only for their own political reasons. Republican politicians want cheap labor, democrats want people dependent on the Government so as to increase their voter block.

I hope this dies a painful death...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070519/ap_on_re_us/immigration_defining_family

 

[Annie]

I have to post this, even though not feeling well ).

I am all for stopping illegal immigration. For securing our borders and kicking out illegal aliens. BUT this is not a good plan. America is a nation of immigrants. We should NEVER lose that, this goes a long way to destroying that. The excuse that a "nuclear" family is important but other family members aren't is bullshit. I can not believe Republicans support this concept.

For those unaware, on Immigration I do NOT see any political party that cares about the real issues, both parties want it to continue.... But only for their own political reasons. Republican politicians want cheap labor, democrats want people dependent on the Government so as to increase their voter block.

I hope this dies a painful death...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070519/ap_on_re_us/immigration_defining_family

If we were speaking of 'legal immigrants' I'd agree, but we are not. This whole thing sucks. Enforce the laws, change the numbers, etc.

 

[maineman]

Republican politicians want cheap labor, democrats want people dependent on the Government so as to increase their voter block.

I agree with the first half of that statement...the second half is total bullshit.

Do they allow illegal immigrants to vote in YOUR state? I would suggest they do not. Voting is a right and a responsibility of citizenship. Illegal aliens cannot increase anyone's voter bloc.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Glad I stopped by, actually YES, they do. The Liberals bus illegal immigrants to polling sites in heavily democratic districts and "help" them fill out ( also illegal) the ballot or the touch screen now,

And I understand California and Texas ( and I am sure other States as well) have a problem with illegal aliens voting.

Talk about an inability to NOT BE PARTISAN.

 

[red states rule]

I agree with the first half of that statement...the second half is total bullshit.

Do they allow illegal immigrants to vote in YOUR state? I would suggest they do not. Voting is a right and a responsibility of citizenship. Illegal aliens cannot increase anyone's voter bloc.

Dems are trying to change that law

Now if you have a green card - that should be enough to allow you to vote

and since when did it matter to Dems if an illegal voted - as long as they are voting for Dems they don't care

 

[red states rule]

I agree with the first half of that statement...the second half is total bullshit.

Do they allow illegal immigrants to vote in YOUR state? I would suggest they do not. Voting is a right and a responsibility of citizenship. Illegal aliens cannot increase anyone's voter bloc.

In Boston, city councilor Felix Arroyo proposes allowing green card holders the right to vote in municipal elections. What do you think about that?

The federal government has disenfranchised millions of people across the country because the naturalization process is such a mess. But these are families who are really the core of cities and towns, so their voices and their votes should count in local elections.
http://www.gonewz.com/index.php?mac...cleid=134&cntnt01origid=15&cntnt01returnid=15



Of cousre Dems want to get the illegals to vote - it is a huge untapped voting block for them. Dems will be the Mommy and Daddy party to them

 

[William Joyce]

I have to post this, even though not feeling well ).

I am all for stopping illegal immigration. For securing our borders and kicking out illegal aliens. BUT this is not a good plan. America is a nation of immigrants. We should NEVER lose that, this goes a long way to destroying that. The excuse that a "nuclear" family is important but other family members aren't is bullshit. I can not believe Republicans support this concept.

For those unaware, on Immigration I do NOT see any political party that cares about the real issues, both parties want it to continue.... But only for their own political reasons. Republican politicians want cheap labor, democrats want people dependent on the Government so as to increase their voter block.

I hope this dies a painful death...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070519/ap_on_re_us/immigration_defining_family

What's dying a painful death is America.

The "family reunification" idea is the biggest crock going... every illegal, 12-20 million of them, can now bring all the rest in? That's America, population 1 billion, in about 5 years flat. You think that's a good idea? Gunny, killing off American families to support Pakistani families isn't family values. It's genocide.

 

[Care4all]

In Boston, city councilor Felix Arroyo proposes allowing green card holders the right to vote in municipal elections. What do you think about that?

The federal government has disenfranchised millions of people across the country because the naturalization process is such a mess. But these are families who are really the core of cities and towns, so their voices and their votes should count in local elections.
http://www.gonewz.com/index.php?mac...cleid=134&cntnt01origid=15&cntnt01returnid=15



Of cousre Dems want to get the illegals to vote - it is a huge untapped voting block for them. Dems will be the Mommy and Daddy party to them

but rsr, it says green card holders.... green card holders are NOT illegal aliens or undocumented workers.... green card holders live here in the usa LEGALLY...waiting the very long and messed up process to become a citizen...with children that are citizens too....they pay all the same taxes as you and me, including property taxes for their children's schools...

he is NOT asking that they be aloud to vote in a state or federal election, but the elections involving their local community politics....

i think i would agree with the city councilor on in this...but not completely sold....i would need to find out more.

In Boston, city councilor Felix Arroyo proposes allowing green card holders the right to vote in municipal elections. What do you think about that?

The federal government has disenfranchised millions of people across the country because the naturalization process is such a mess. But these are families who are really the core of cities and towns, so their voices and their votes should count in local elections.

care

 

[Truthmatters]

Glad I stopped by, actually YES, they do. The Liberals bus illegal immigrants to polling sites in heavily democratic districts and "help" them fill out ( also illegal) the ballot or the touch screen now,

And I understand California and Texas ( and I am sure other States as well) have a problem with illegal aliens voting.

Talk about an inability to NOT BE PARTISAN.

link? proof ? anythign to back this load of horse shit?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

link? proof ? anythign to back this load of horse shit?

Personal observation, of course the liberal news in the area wont report it. But do feel free to call me a liar.

 

[pegwinn]

link? proof ? anythign to back this load of horse shit?

Personal observation, of course the liberal news in the area wont report it. But do feel free to call me a liar.

Perhaps I can be of some assistance.

BTW, I am all for immigration. I have no problem with the idea of streamlining the process and using technology to leverage it. My sole complaint with illegals is the fact that they are well, illegal.

Wanna fix the problem? It's the bosses ....

 

[Annie]

Perhaps I can be of some assistance.

BTW, I am all for immigration. I have no problem with the idea of streamlining the process and using technology to leverage it. My sole complaint with illegals is the fact that they are well, illegal.

Wanna fix the problem? It's the bosses ....

I tried to rep you, alas the answer was, 'no.' So I have to type agreement. I'm strongly in favor of legal immigrants, including increasing the numbers, but first the illegal problem needs to be addressed. Yes, starting with fining, then jailing the employers.

 

[Gunny]

I tried to rep you, alas the answer was, 'no.' So I have to type agreement. I'm strongly in favor of legal immigrants, including increasing the numbers, but first the illegal problem needs to be addressed. Yes, starting with fining, then jailing the employers.

Got it covered.

 

[Annie]

Got it covered.

Thanks!

 

[pegwinn]

I tried to rep you, alas the answer was, 'no.' So I have to type agreement. I'm strongly in favor of legal immigrants, including increasing the numbers, but first the illegal problem needs to be addressed. Yes, starting with fining, then jailing the employers.

Tis the thought that counts lass.

 

[JeffWartman]

We have laws against illegal immigration in this country. New laws are merely new laws that will not be enforced. We need to concentrate less on trying to write new immigration law, and concentrate more on enforcing the law that already exists. These people are ILLEGAL. They are CRIMINALS. We have laws AGAINST this. ENFORCE the LAW.

However, both parties are selling the American people out. The lovefest between Lindsey Graham and Ted Kennedy is sickening.

The politicians are supposed to work for us. These people are not doing their jobs. We can FIRE them by voting them out of office. However, most people do not have enough of a spine to vote for whats right and keep voting in pro-amnesty politicians.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The problem is that most politicians in both parties DO NOT care about Mexican illegal aliens. Not the ones IN Congress and not the ones likely to replace them. As for the idea that illegal immigrants are going to petition to bring in their families, umm what part of ILLEGAL has been missed.

Legal immigrants that become citizens should continue to have the right to sponsor family members from their original country. It is a LONG process to get in the country legally and then it takes at least 5 more years before one can apply for citizenship. Once they are sworn in as citizens they should have the right to petition for their family members to come to this country.

 

[red states rule]

but rsr, it says green card holders.... green card holders are NOT illegal aliens or undocumented workers.... green card holders live here in the usa LEGALLY...waiting the very long and messed up process to become a citizen...with children that are citizens too....they pay all the same taxes as you and me, including property taxes for their children's schools...

he is NOT asking that they be aloud to vote in a state or federal election, but the elections involving their local community politics....

i think i would agree with the city councilor on in this...but not completely sold....i would need to find out more.



care

I always thought voting was a right for US citizens

 

[red states rule]

I have to post this, even though not feeling well ).

I am all for stopping illegal immigration. For securing our borders and kicking out illegal aliens. BUT this is not a good plan. America is a nation of immigrants. We should NEVER lose that, this goes a long way to destroying that. The excuse that a "nuclear" family is important but other family members aren't is bullshit. I can not believe Republicans support this concept.

For those unaware, on Immigration I do NOT see any political party that cares about the real issues, both parties want it to continue.... But only for their own political reasons. Republican politicians want cheap labor, democrats want people dependent on the Government so as to increase their voter block.

I hope this dies a painful death...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070519/ap_on_re_us/immigration_defining_family

Good news - this insane bill may not make it

Few senators support the illegals bill
By Stephen Dinan and S.A. Miller
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
May 21, 2007


Fewer than 20 senators are publicly committed to supporting the immigration deal that hits the Senate floor today while nearly 40 are already opposed or have serious concerns, underscoring how difficult it will be for President Bush and his allies to craft a coalition that can pass the bill.
A Washington Times survey of Senate offices and public comments after the deal was announced Thursday found an additional 32 senators who said they cannot even take a position yet -- a result of the fact that the deal was written in secret by a dozen senators and the Bush administration, wasn't even finalized until yesterday and still hasn't reached many Senate offices.
"I did not agree to any immigration deal and was not part of the negotiations," said Sen. Jim Bunning, Kentucky Republican and a likely opponent. "From what I have heard about the bill, it gives amnesty to the estimated 12.5 million illegal immigrants in this country."
Senators will be asked to make their first vote on the measure today, on whether to begin debating the bill. It will require 60 votes to pass, and leaders of both parties are urging their members to vote for it, so the debate can at least begin.
Opposition comes from the left and the right -- and both sides are vowing to offer amendments to try to move the bill. What is not clear is whether the two sides will be willing to team up to scuttle the bill.


http://washingtontimes.com/national/20070521-121929-4099r.htm

 

[red states rule]

Immigration debacle
TODAY'S EDITORIAL
May 21, 2007


The bipartisan immigration "reform" legislation pushed by Sens. Edward M. Kennedy and Jon Kyl and others, applauded by Michael Chertoff, the secretary of Homeland Security, and Carlos Gutierrez, the secretary of Commerce, is a disaster in the making. That is not so slowly becoming abundantly clear.
It's a disaster for national security, for keeping Islamist jihadists out of the country, for exploding the costs of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, for preserving the rule of law, and for that quaint principle called national sovereignty. From the details that have leaked out thus far, the legislation, which provides amnesty for nearly all of the 12 million (or maybe even 20 million) illegal aliens already here, would swell the size of the welfare state in a way we haven't seen since Lyndon Johnson imposed his Great Society on us four decades ago. Sen. Jeff Sessions, the Alabama Republican who is likely to lead the fight to save the nation from this disaster, and Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation will reveal at a press conference this morning the details of just how expensive it will be. We're talking trillions of dollars -- that's not millions or even billions -- over the next several decades.
Senate floor debate on the bill begins today, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid clearly wants to force it through before Memorial Day, before senators and everyone else can become familiar with even a fraction of what is in this massive bill, which could run to 800 pages. It was still being written over the weekend. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who is said to lean in favor of the bill, yesterday said that at least two weeks would be required for a serious Senate debate on such a complex piece of legislation. We hope he means it when he says "serious debate." To win the support of conservatives who opposed last year's immigration bill, the administration agreed that provisions enabling illegals to remain here could only become effective after new border-control measures are in place.
These include the hiring, training and deployment of 5,000 to 6,000 additional Border Patrol agents, increasing the total to approximately 18,000 agents. (Assuming there are 12 million illegals here, this amounts to 2,000 of them getting amnesty for every new Border Patrol agent hired to keep illegals out).
The legislation calls for erecting 370 miles of additional fencing along the U.S.-Mexican border. To put that number in perspective, in October, the Senate passed legislation sponsored by Rep. Duncan Hunter, California Republican, calling for 854 miles of fencing. Mr. Hunter protests that the Senate bill in effect "cuts my fence in half." (Actually, it's closer to 55 percent.) That assumes of course, that Congress actually keeps its word and appropriates money for the fence. Counting on Congress is always a very big "if." Another "trigger" requires that the Department of Homeland Security -- not a model of bureaucratic efficiency -- develop and implement by the end of next year a system to enable employers to quickly verify that job applicants are in the country legally. In exchange for such very modest achievements, the administration and the Senate propose to make enormous and in some cases unacceptable concessions to illegal aliens and their political patrons. Here are some of them:
m Amnesty, document fraud and terrorism: There is good reason to be skeptical of the notion that United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) -- the Homeland Security bureaucracy that will be charged with verifying whether tens of millions of illegals are terrorists and/or criminals, and therefore ineligible to receive amnesty -- is up to the job. Over the past four years, the ineptitude of the immigration services bureaucracy has been severely criticized by the Office of Inspector General and the Government Accountability Office and other investigators. This, according to Michael Cutler, who spent more than 25 years as an immigration agent, would "provide millions of illegal aliens who have violated our nation's borders" with "official identity documents that would enable terrorists to embed themselves in communities around our country as they await instructions to launch the next terrorist attack against against our nation and the people who live in the United States." Mr. Cutler says the Senate bill should be named the "Terrorist Assistance and Facilitation Act of 2007."
m Staggering increases in federal, state and local spending, with attendant pressure for tax increases. Mr. Rector of the Heritage Foundation says one major effect of the Senate amnesty bill will be to make approximately 9 million additional persons -- many of them low-skilled immigrants -- legal permanent residents of the United States who could lawfully benefit from a variety of social programs, including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income and public housing. Over the course of their lifetimes, these people will utilize $2.5 trillion more in government services than they will pay in taxes. American welfare and social services were designed for poor Americans; as a result of amnesty legislation, this legislation would expand the American welfare state to include a significant portion of the population of Mexico. Instead of going home to Mexico at the end of their working years, these elderly beneficiaries of amnesty would remain in this country "and collect public funds for the rest of their lives," Mr. Rector says.
m The Senate immigration bill includes legislation called the DREAM act, legislation subsidizing college education for illegal aliens. And what a dream it is.
m Illegal aliens who worked using fraudulently obtained Social Security numbers will be able to collect Social Security Disability Insurance.
The Bush administration deludes itself if it believes that the measure can be improved during Senate debate. Right now, the toughest criticism of the bill is coming from labor unions who argue that the amnesty/guest-worker provisions are too strict, and from senators like Mel Martinez of Florida, a Republican who talks of waiving the much-ballyhooed $5,000 fine illegals are meant to pay. If the administration wants to preserve what's left of its credibility on immigration, it would spare us Mr. Chertoff's hyperbolic rhetoric that critics of the administration regard anything short of capital punishment to be "amnesty." The only "capital punishment" coming is what's likely to happen to the careers of those determined to inflict this disaster on us.

http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20070520-094056-4013r.htm