New immigration bill will attract illegals
The Senate with input from the White House has come up with a new “comprehensive” immigration bill which would grant an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants a path to citizenship once they’ve jumped through enough contorted hoops.
During the intervening years, the illegal workers would be granted “Z” visas to continue working and receiving medical, educational and other benefits at our expense, the cost of which is as much as $20,000 per year for each family and paid by us. The illegal workers who have committed numerous felonies such as document fraud and, in many cases, identity theft, would pay a token “penalty” of $5,000. This would put a small dent in transfers to Mexico, which currently is the largest beneficiary of American funds. Keep in mind that most of the transfers by illegal workers from all countries have not been taxed in this country.
Meanwhile the employers will probably not be penalized, or at best receive a slap on the wrist, and be allowed to continue employing these “Z” visa workers without complying with all our labor laws.
If the 1986 immigration law attracted illegal immigration because of its total lack of enforcement, this will be an even greater incentive. So much for our culture and national security.
Tom Melrose, Highlands Ranch
Tom - you are absolutely correct. However the leadership of both the Republican and Democratic Party are working to pass this bill. Help the mavericks: Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul.
Posted by Dave on May 21, 2007 03:25 AMA vote for this bill is a vote against the American Citizen.
Posted by Kay on May 21, 2007 05:07 AMA vote for this bill is a vote against the American Citizen.
Posted by Kay on May 21, 2007 05:09 AM
www.numbersusa.com
Millions of American jobs are being lost to cheaper labor pools in third world countries, and the exportation of American jobs has been allowed by Congress in the name of free trade. Now our legislators wish to legally import third world labor to help negate and depress middle and lower income wages for their US citizens.
Fight the good fight and demand representation from you Congress.
Posted by Citizens Unite on May 21, 2007 06:00 AMFolks, there are a few regular blowhards on these boards that although they are articulate, have either stupidity or a hidden agenda fueling their smug ridicule of anyone against this insane pro-illegal policy.
They use words like bigot, racist, xenophobe, nativist, etc. etc. and constantly cite "mob" mentality. Some of them I suspect are politicians or activists, and as such, fear any kind of mob not on their side. Mobs are what remove corrupt politicians from power.
So these charlatans will try to bog you down with long rambling posts and quotes all day, but really they are just calling anyone who disagrees with their "enlightened" point of view a redneck moron. DONT BUY IT!!!
Resistance to this INVASION is sane, patriotic, logical and NOT AT ALL RACIST. Hold your ground! While you are out working and providing for your families, these arrogant "intellectuals" are studying new ways to twist words in an attempt to make them selves look superior. But boil down the BS and you can clearly see that all there is to these people is narcissism.
Email, fax, call your Congressman and Senators, also call Kennedy and tell him what a liar he is. We went through this in 1986, was told by the idiots (Kennedy especially) that this would be a one time deal and that our borders would be secured, HAH What a joke. Stand together people and fight back with your phone calls, faxes, and emails, we can win this one if everyone takes the time to do it. Go to numbersusa.com. This is a fight worth fighting, don't sell out America and its citizens.
Posted by Pam on May 21, 2007 06:41 AMYou are all a bunch of idiots
Posted by on May 21, 2007 07:21 AM7:21 AM
You must be one of those "itellectuals" I was talking about.
Posted by truthy on May 21, 2007 07:27 AMANYONE WHO IS AGAINST ILLEGAL ALIENS AND AMNESTY TAKE NOTICE:
Truth,Anderson, Charles B, Sharon B, Old Grouch and a few other poor misguided PRO-AMNESTY promoters will GANG UP on anyone who is ANTI illegal alien.
THEY WILL attempt to get their opinions out and CONTROL the boards that are anti illetgal alien and anti amnesty by posting,and,posting and posting.
This is one of their tactics to try and convince anyone reading the comments that they are correct in their total LOVE affair with the illegals and their UNDYING HATE for America.
Want some excellent advice IGNORE THEM!
I skip over their posts completely! If you try and make intelligent comments or question any of them you will get the same old far,far, left rhetoric! They also revert to name calling and bashing if you back them against the wall with sane, and believable comments concerning illegals.
You will see a fine example of trying to control a board if you scroll down to the "immigrants" letter farther down in this weeks RMN letters section.....notice how they completely control the board. Ignore them in the future!!! If you answer any of them your actually HELPING them. They will BAIT anyone who does not agree with them!
So is anyone surprised that the politicians are once again trying to fleece the sheeple? When you depend on government, you are a slave to government.
Posted by on May 21, 2007 07:33 AMT
OOOOOHHHHH I am so AFRAID!!!!! Like I care what anyone thinks about my opinions, get a grip!!!!!!!
Posted by Pam on May 21, 2007 07:57 AMT.
Did not mean for that to sound that directly to you, I meant for Anderson, Old Grouch, etc.
Posted by Pam on May 21, 2007 07:59 AMThis just in from the Hill...a new amendment to the immigration bill...they now get legal status AND a new toaster!! Hot damn!
Posted by shaupeen on May 21, 2007 08:08 AMif illegals will not come forward now with the risk of being deported, what makes you think they will pay $5000 for the 'y' visa? it accomplishes nothing. what good are the politicians?
Posted by ktr on May 21, 2007 08:13 AMT is right. The Clueless Commie Crew of Progressives (CCCP) attempt a boring and mind-numbing use of lecture and sophistry to dominate the forum.
Frankly, I'm not the mood for the CCCP on this topic. Anyone know of any Colorado militias?
Posted by John II on May 21, 2007 08:37 AMEgg 'em on John! Egg 'em on! You're an expert at it.
By the way, thanks for the handle "Commie".
Coming from YOU, that's a compliment. Especially in view of the fact that you're the one always concerned about other people's use of "civility", and "proper courtesy". Towards YOU, of course.
It appears now that you are finally beginning to show your true colors. Those of one who will always be - safely and comfortably - BEHIND the mob.
Posted by Old Grouch on May 21, 2007 08:52 AMIgnore,ignore,ignore...good advice T.
Posted by The Godfather on May 21, 2007 09:20 AMT...you're right..arn't you sick of Anderson already. Skip over...
Posted by on May 21, 2007 09:42 AMGreat advice T !
Posted by truthy on May 21, 2007 09:46 AMThis proposal will bring about another flood of illegal immigration. Even if they are required to pay fines or back taxes, the end result is legal permission to work and stay for any period of time in the U.S. Is amnesty!!
The end result according to economic experts across this land will be disastrous to the infrastructer of America. Third world staus looms for the U.S.
If amnesty is ramrodded down the American people's throat we should all fly the stars and stripes at half mast.
However I am a proud American and I think American citizens should not take this laying down!!!
We should take to the streets in Massive numbers all over this nation and have demostrations like no one has ever witnessed before.
Do you suppose that will get the politicians and special interests groups attention?????
We need to stop this insanity!!!!!!!
Posted by A on May 21, 2007 10:00 AMHere is the bottom line.When the Republicans controled the House and Senate an illegal alien bill like the one we have now would not have made it to the floor for a vote.It would have been killed in committee.To you folks that do not vote Republican you are the reason this has happened.Also the Democrats are pushing this bill because they know that the illegals will vote for them.The Democrats are also ,in other states, pushing to let criminals vote.The Democrats know that criminals both illegal aliens and other criminals will vote for them given the chance.What does that tell you about the Democrat party?
Posted by Ron on May 21, 2007 10:13 AM
Right-On T,
I love the absurd arguments which have no comparable value. They try to compare the uncontrolled flood of Mexico's surplus population into the US with those who got off the Mayflower, saying, "They didn't have visas either!!" They know the US didn't even exist back then. I also laugh at the racist accusations when they themselves are promoting LATINOS at EVERYBODY else's expense!! Who are the real racists here?
Remember to write your congress person and tell them you want the border actually protected before talking about anything else!
Also, vote out Ken Salazar who wants the poverty created by Mexico's corrupt politicians to be YOUR problem.
Posted by VOTE OUT KEN SALAZAR on May 21, 2007 10:20 AMT, by god, knows how to achieve victory in the illegal immigration debate. Just control the forum threads. Boy, how old is this guy? I think he is under the impression that Congress starts out its day by reviewing the RMN forums. Have fun in your playpen, T.
Posted by Truth on May 21, 2007 10:33 AMNew Flash!!! The extremists have scored a resounding victory in the immigration debate. They have controlled at least four different RMN threads on the subject. Boy, they really have the moderates reeling. It's just a matter of time before they will be able to control all of the threads and then on to the Denver Post for more resounding victories. What a powerhouse; soon they will have the whole playpen to themselves.
Meanwhile, recess is over; back to reality. The news from Washington.
Posted by Truth on May 21, 2007 10:38 AMJohn II: "Anyone know of any Colorado militias?"
Would somebody please join John II in a revolution so he can get it out of his system?
Posted by Truth on May 21, 2007 10:41 AMThe Bible tells me that god created a daughter for Adam and he took her for his wife and in a geologic blink a Jew from the "loins of David" transmogrified into a Christian god destined for assisted suicide with the help of Romans and Jews came on the scene.
The media tells me that America seeks assisted suicide with the help of Republicrats, America's two-party system.
I read/hear that mostly Mexican criminals in their own country are fording the river and jumping the fence and 27,000, perhaps 10%, of them are in federal prison.
A rewind to the Reagan era: Isn't he the guy who started this amnesty business assuring America the problem of illegal immigration had been solved?
Don't argue: Eve came from Adam's rib and that is his own flesh and blood whom he married; however, tell me America is not seeking assisted suicide. Me, your friendly deicide.
Posted by Richard Grimes Risen Ape r22037@yahoo.com (ffrf.org) on May 21, 2007 10:41 AMMy Fellow Americans,
By the time I am sworn in as President, the current Congress will have passed “comprehensive immigration reform, ” because the elites of America have decided that’s what we need. But the ordinary citizens of the United States want and deserve the rule of law. The advocates of reform insist on rushing a debate on a bill so detailed that it requires one thousand pages. At this time, it is not humanly possible to know what immigration law will look like when I take the oath of office as the head of the Executive Branch of these United States. I want you, the citizens of the United States, to know what I intend to do once in office.
I intend to enforce the immigration law, whatever it turns out to be. Count on it. There will be no more turning a blind eye to infractions by employers, workers, document forgers or criminals. We wouldn’t be in the mess we are in today, if previous Presidents and their executive branches had made serious attempts to enforce the law. The problems would have been exposed and possibly corrected, much sooner. If Congress presents the country with another impossible to enforce immigration code, we shall find it out sooner, rather than later. For I intend to attempt to enforce every bit of it to the maximum extent legally permissible.
I will complete the building of the border fence. I will make use of all employer sanctions. No more “wink, wink, nod, nod,” over employers who violate hiring and reporting requirements. The raids at the Swift plant will look like a walk in the park.
I will treat document forgery as the serious federal offense that it is. Forging US identity documents amounts to counterfeiting citizenship. Under my leadership the Federal government will treat identity fraud as seriously as the Treasury treats counterfeiting. Jail time. Serious fines. Likewise our government will treat human smugglers as kidnappers. I will use the full force of Federal law against coyotes.
I will take all necessary federal steps to deport alien criminals. I will instruct the Justice Department to assist local law enforcement authorities and penal institutions wishing to lower the costs of incarcerating criminal aliens. We will return illegal aliens who have committed crimes in this country to their home countries. And there will be no “path to citizenship” for legal aliens who commit crimes in this country. I will order their immediate deportation.
If Congress passes a temporary worker program, I will implement all necessary procedures to ensure that the temporary workers return home on schedule. Employers who hire workers past their legal return date will be barred from future participation in the program. Workers who overstay their visas will be barred from ever taking the first step on any path to citizenship.
Speaking of the path to citizenship, whatever Congress ultimately decides it will be: under my administration, there will be no processing of applications from illegal aliens until the backlog of applications of legal immigrants has been completely cleared. We will shorten the processing time for everyone already on the legal path to citizenship. There are far too many people who have waited patiently in line to have their applications for entry and citizenship processed. Line-jumping will not be rewarded on my watch.
I will increase the funding, staffing and computerization of the Citizenship and Immigration Services. If Congress won’t appropriate sufficient funds for this, I will use executive orders to halt to all Federal construction projects. I will use those monies already appropriated for pork barrel projects in every state in the Union to modernize and streamline the immigration process.
In short, I will do everything possible to restore the Rule of Law to every aspect of the immigration process. I want Congress to know that whatever bill they pass, I will attempt to enforce it. If they cook up something that they never intend to have enforced, I will call their bluff, right now, a full 18 months before I am inaugurated. The mess will be on the hands of the Congress, not mine.
This is my pledge to the citizens of this great nation, the native-born, and the legal immigrant alike. One way or another, I will create an immigration system that we can be proud of, that represents the best of America, both our generosity and our sense of fair play.
Sincerely,
The Winning Candidate for President, 2008.
Lets hope it is either Ron Paul or Tom Tancredo.
The worst thing you can do to a narcissist is ignore them.
Posted by truthy on May 21, 2007 10:47 AMSince when did offering a dissenting opinion constitute a mob? I guess when you're on the "wrong side".
And to Mr. Melrose and his cheering crowd (but not a mob), we're going to do what about the immigration problem? Nothing? I see a lot of opposition and the usual bogus claims about what horrible people "they" are(immigrants are all the same, you know). And the solution is? [blank] Ah, maybe no solution is sought. Evidently, it's better to be angry and to (figuratively) beat up on "those" people, than to do *anything* about the problem, least of all to deal with any difficult or complex issues, or support those who would.
Posted by anderson on May 21, 2007 10:50 AMThe solution:
1) Build a wall and station troops along the border
2) Deport illegal immigrants
3) Prosecute businesses that hire illegal workers
Right on John II!!!
Posted by A Citizen on May 21, 2007 11:31 AMPEARL HARBOR AMNESTY SNEAK ATTACK.....
Everything is being done behind closed doors, out of the publics view while deploying a process that is highly extraordinary. The whole process is shrouded in secrecy. Why? Because the politicos know that it doesn't pass the transpearancy test. Shine a little light on this Amnesty Bill and it goes right down the crapper.
Who is going to pay for all the coming entitlements?
anderson, and Truth,
You really expect this bunch to come up with a sensible idea? Or even any kind of idea at all?
These guys just mistake a head full of fertilizer for a fertile mind. And all we have here is more shoveling of the same old, same old; sort of 'spreading the wealth around", so to speak.
I think someone at the Rocky is having a good belly laugh right now. And he, or she, is entitled to it. It must be excruciatingly wearing having to always mind the kiddies in the playpen. So, let's see what happens when they are turned loose.
Since we've been told that they aren't going to pay any attention to us anyway, why not just leave them to their own juvenile passtimes?
Posted by Old Grouch on May 21, 2007 11:39 AMJay, Great post!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by [A Citizen] A on May 21, 2007 11:40 AMSen. Sessions has the floor right now and he is urging that this bill not be pushed through without discussion. Bet that has Kennedy upset.
Posted by truthy on May 21, 2007 11:46 AMOld Grouch: "These guys just mistake a head full of fertilizer for a fertile mind. And all we have here is more shoveling of the same old, same old; sort of 'spreading the wealth around", so to speak."
Heh, well it seems evident someone's been planting and cultivating weeds, and it's incumbent upon every good gardener, or citizen, to pull up a few as we walk through, lest our garden becomes a briar patch or one choked by poisonous plants.
Posted by anderson on May 21, 2007 11:58 AMI have called both Allard's and Salizar's offices to voice my opposition to this Amnesty bill. Also sent faxes through www.numbersusa.com, several times. I hope we can put a dent into this bill, if not get it stuffed outright.
Posted by Jay on May 21, 2007 12:10 PMAnd your solution to the immigration problem is to do what? Leave as is?
Posted by anderson on May 21, 2007 12:19 PMGood advice T !
Posted by truthy on May 21, 2007 12:21 PMDon't want to deal with any tough questions, truthy? I guess that all makes it pretty simple. I suppose you can let Bill O'Reilly do your thinking for you--if you don't mind getting worked up all the time. Wonderful.
Posted by anderson on May 21, 2007 12:30 PMDo you guys hear a buzzing sound in here?
Posted by truthy on May 21, 2007 12:33 PMPut a 30% withholding tax on any money wired out of the US unless legal residency can be proven.
Posted by Bob on May 21, 2007 12:45 PMOk Old Grouch, what is your solution to the Illegal Immigration problem. Can you provide an answer without insults?? I would love to hear what you have to say on the subject. I have read through many of your writings throughout this Opinion Section and you have mastered the art of trash talk, but seriously how would you resolve this problem...permanently??
Posted by Greg Sanchez on May 21, 2007 12:50 PMDo you hear the sound of posts being made by pro illegal activists falling on deafening ears?? Uh, guess not, my mistake, I thought for sure Old Grouch and Anderson were putting there two cents in, but then when you put them on ignore it doesn't hurt the eyes so bad.
Posted by Pam on May 21, 2007 12:54 PMIf you can't make arguments, you can at least go personal. That's something I learned from talk radio. Evidently someone else other than me is listening too.
Posted by anderson on May 21, 2007 01:09 PMGood advice T !
Posted by truthy on May 21, 2007 01:12 PMWould 10 years without immigration to the USA destroy this nation? Would 10 years without immigration give this nation a chance to get things back in order fiscally, culturally, spiritually or otherwise? I'd be willing to give it a try. I do not place blame on those who want to achieve a better life for themselves and their families, but why do the taxpayers of the USA have to pay all the bills? Why can't Mexico as a nation be improved by its citizens? Why do they all feel they have to move to the USA instead of fixing their own nation? For those of you open border advocates, aybe there could be one of those little check boxes on the tax forms that say "I would like my tax return to go towards families of illegal aliens", or I would like to pay $X amount of additional tax so I can help the family of an illegal aliens. Compassion and charity are all fine and good, but charity begins at home. We should take care of the citizens before trying to solve all the rest of the worlds ills. Anderson, what does piker mean?
Posted by Jay on May 21, 2007 01:32 PMJay you did the right thing contacting both of your senators and telling them you are against the Illegal Alien Bill.Keep calling your senators.It is working.
Posted by Ron on May 21, 2007 01:43 PMJay, I can't read your mind but one way to read your comments is that you're showing contempt for all of us by asserting that U.S. taxpayers are paying all the bills for immigrants. Like Lou Dobbs, you maybe think we're all pretty stupid and anything you say will fly. Either that, or you're grossly misinformed.
Posted by anderson on May 21, 2007 01:44 PMAnderson asks what should be done?
How about we treat the border as a secure border. Anyone attempting to cross it illegally will be shot.
Let's fine the companies that hire illegals so that it hurts, not $200, but $200,000 per illegal.
Let's change the law so that anyone born to a legal immigrant (green card holder, unexpired visa holder, citizen) becomes a citizen, not just anyone born here.
Let's open the books a little more and not have so much red tape for those that want to come to the US legally don't have to wait 10 - 18 years.
Let's stop with the bi-tri-quad-lingual notices and "for Spanish, press 2" in the US. Give an incentive to learn the language.
Let's use a guest worker program, but insure livable wages are actually paid, vs under the table cash only wages.
Anderson,
I was able to offer suggestions. I am sincerely interested in reading what you would like to see done.
Dan 2, good stuff, especially the part about fixing the way the 'legal' immigration system works so that folks are not stuck in limbo for years and years by trying to do the right thing. I work with folks who have gone that route and we threw them a party at work the day they got citizenship. It was great! However, Anderson, they took the time and effort to do it right, not just make demands while at the same time calling all citizens against ILLEGAL immigration, racists. And no, I do not think everyone here is stupid, or that everything I say will fly. But at least I care for my nation and am putting my $$$$ where my mouth is. I do not want my children and grandchildren forced to have Spanish as a 1st language, and I am sick of having to buy everything made in China because so many of the 'real' jobs that used to be in America, are no longer here. I appreciate the Constitution and it makes me want to puke when others want to promote globalism at the expense of our nation, our constitution and my family's well being.
Posted by Jay on May 21, 2007 02:10 PMYeah, anderson, let's hear your suggestions.
Don't hold your breath, people......
Posted by RickyLee on May 21, 2007 02:18 PMAmen Jay and Dan 2, I like the ideas to solve the problems this country is facing
Posted by Pam on May 21, 2007 02:21 PMDan,
Remember why I asked what should be done. Because many here are merely opposed to what's being proposed and offer no solutions in return (none that would be accepted anyway).
I think we need a path to citizenship for those who work here--for those who want it;
Visa quotas that reflect the reality of the demand in our economy now and in the projected future;
An immigration policy that minimally disrupts the families;
Labor protections for all workers;
A reasonable security policy (i.e., not shooting people--this isn't Berlin)
A policy that reflects and takes into account the root causes of migration to this country.
I'm not worried about language in the least. We've always been a country of mixed languages, and there is plenty of incentive to learn English.
I'm a citizen by birth, and if it's good enough for me, it's good enough for others. Your suggestion that we change this particular provision would take no less than a constitutional amendment.
That's ideal. I know there are competing ideas, and I'm willing to accept some compromise. What's not acceptable is letting the current situation go on.
Thanks Jay.
But I am for globalization. I think that with a global economy, the rules will eventually even out, and it will not make fiscal sense for American companies to relocate to other countries for "cheaper labor." That is also why I am not opposed to "corporate welfare" if it means keeping the company here in the US vs. relocating.
That is another reason why I am for legal immigration to raise wages so that there is no fiscal incentive to hire illegals, so that those that are in the construction trade will have the same opportunity to make "fair market wages" as those in white collar industry.
I am also a realist and understand that "we" are as much to blame for this mess. "We" tell our kids they don't have to work in fast food, or have summer jobs in construction, that "we" will take care of them so they can go to soccer, baseball, gymnastics, have a summer off of school because they work so hard (take your pick). "We" stopped giving them a work ethic.
As a historian, throughout American history, we have been bombarded with "immigration" and the over-reaching reaction of such. When the Chinese took the "jobs no one else wanted" in the late 1800's. When the Eastern Europeans (Germans, Poles, Italians) immigrated in the early 1900's and again "took the jobs no one wanted." And when the Irish immigrated after the potato famine and became cops and firemen (they didn't have to learn the language at least). The same out-cry was heard then, they will over-populate the country, drain our resources and "take away the American dream."
I don't know. To me it seems like we should stop feeling sorry for people, because when we feel sorry for someone, we are making ourselves feel superior, and that to me, is just as bad as being bigoted.
Posted by Dan2 on May 21, 2007 02:45 PMThis whole thing is great. It gives the right wing something to try and have people focus their attention on rather than the War in Iraq
Posted by GOP Man on May 21, 2007 02:52 PMOr the corruption of the Attorney General.
Posted by on May 21, 2007 02:53 PManderson,
"Because many here are merely opposed to what's being proposed and offer no solutions in return (none that would be accepted anyway)."
It is this type of talk that infuriates people. We say over and over again, "Guard the border, build a wall, deport illegals, fine employers that hire illegals". If may or may not be accepted but that is irrelevant. This is what we want and we've been very clear about it.
You have managed to offer nothing in terms of a solution. Nothing. What you wrote at 2:34PM was so vague that we'd probably get more meaning out of a random striking of the keyboard.
"An immigration policy that minimally disrupts the families; "
What does that mean? What are we supposed to do with that statement?
"A reasonable security policy"
That's great, anderson. Again, what does that mean? What do you consider reasonable?
"A policy that reflects and takes into account the root causes of migration to this country."
So, when we determine that the root cause is poor uneducated workers from Mexico sneaking into this country to work for unscrupulous businesses that hire illegal aliens, then what?
"What's not acceptable is letting the current situation go on."
In other words, we cannot let the problem of illegal immigrants go on so we should just call them legal and settle the issue.
Posted by John II on May 21, 2007 02:53 PMAnderson,
I think we can philosophically agree on a lot of points.
A couple of areas where I think we could eventually compromise would be:
"An immigration policy that minimally disrupts the families" - I would think if it would be easier to immigrate legally, this would not be an issue, but if you take the chance and commit a crime, if you get caught, the CRIMINAL is responsible for family disruption, not the agency enforcing the law.
"Labor protections for all workers" - We are in philosophical agreement, but I would add one caveat and that would be all "legal workers." Again, if you commit a crime, you can't expect to use the law only when it suits you.
"A policy that reflects and takes into account the root causes of migration to this country" - This is where we really do agree, but probably for different reasons (I am assuming, bad on my part). I would prefer an internal look at why our own people are not taking the "jobs no one else will take," vs. why others are trying to get into the country. Simple economics for me. If we eliminate the demand for low wage earners, the illegal supply will eventually tide as well.
I want to thank you for responding, as I find it is easier to reach compromise, and solve problems when we do listen to what the differing opinions are, not call names (both sides), and better understand how opinions are formed and where there is indeed some middle ground. We can't make everyone happy, but when we look at it realistically, there is a solution somewhere.
Posted by Dan2 on May 21, 2007 03:01 PMMr Sanchez,
I posted at some length concerning the necessity to begin any form of plan with basic cost estimates; and working from there to then offer alternatives to the rant about "ILLEGAL", " ROUND UP AND THROW BACK ACROSS THE BORDER", "BUILD A WALL", etc., etc., that were the buzz-words and battle cries at the time.
Some 3, or 4, people took the time to read, and offer some additional - or alternative - suggestions. The rest of the replies were of the kind put up by the ones who hold to "just ignore" anything that doesn't agree with whatever be their current spouting. That was some 3 or 4 out of high double digit numbers.
And perhaps you haven't read the early postings today. Where it is agreed that nothing that I, or others, might say will even be read. Not to mention some remarks about "Commie", in reference to a few of us who don't simply look "for a militia".
When someone tells me that anything I have to say is to be simply ignored, I see no use in wasting time attempting to communicate. I had snot-nose little brats in class starting some 60 years ago. That was then; and my duty then was to at least try to teach them something, whether or not they wanted to learn.
This is now. Those who don't want to learn, won't. And, I, for myself, see no need to waste further time on that kind of thing.
anderson,
Go back in the archives, and find what I wrote then. Feel free to "cut and paste", or use it in any way you want, if you think it at all usable. Or, go down a ways, to what I wrote earlier about doing something TO SUPPORT A PLAN, rather than just ranting NEGATIVES about the fact that a plan exists, especially after spending weeks doing nothing but ranting NEGATIVES because neither Congress nor the President had come up with a plan.
These people don't want to learn. And, they won't.
Dan 2.
Since shooting them at the border is really what most of these folks want anyway, I guess that part of what you have written will be at least read, if not praised.
As to the rest: Aside from the matter of dealing with the XIV Amendment - which is the "citizen by birth" foundation stone - and trying to change, or modify, it an any way, you have done an excellent job of presenting something that can be - or can be made to be - workable.
For myself, I would agree with your citizenship changes, even though I do feel that achieving that result is impossible, for quite a number of reasons.
I think the bi-lingual notice part is somewhat premature. And although I know it is somewhat out of line here, I would mention that we have quite a population of several generation Spanish speaking CITIZENS, by birth, around here. Most of the Front Range having been Mexico, prior to the conflict between the U.S. and that nation.
The various plans to "assimilate" Native Americans, by yanking them up from their own cultures, and forcing English - and the white man's ways - on them in what amounted to "reform schools", didn't work; and I don't believe a similar program could work now.
On the other hand, I would insert a demand that there be fluency in English before any Citizenship be granted. This fluency should be family wide - depending, of course, on the age of children at the time of Citizenship application. I do, however, stop short of any form of "English only" approach; and/or "national language establishment" by Statute.
There are very good parts of the present plan as well. Let's SUPPORT something, not just howl about how it "ought to be done THIS way, or NOT AT ALL!".
Posted by Old Grouch on May 21, 2007 03:02 PMAnderson is BAITING AGAIN ......IGNORE!!
Posted by [A Citizen] A on May 21, 2007 03:13 PMWe should all be able to appreciate, and respect our differences in culture and history, but we need to come together as 1 for the sake of this nation and the future of our progeny. I'm glad so many are concerned enough to get involved in this discussion. Lets hope we can all work towards getting our elected officials to do something logical, that looks out for the American citizen first, the rest of the world second, and shows true compassion for all. Not just the soundbites we heard before the last 2 elections.l
Posted by Jay on May 21, 2007 03:20 PMMr. Sanchez,
Or perhaps you might go down the line a bit, to the letter titled "A Declaration of War". What suggestions would you offer there?
The simple reality is, there could be plans and suggestions, here, in Congress, and from the Executive Desk; and these people would not be satisfied. No matter WHERE, OR HOW, you agreed, there would be another "THIS WAY FIRST, OR NO WAY AT ALL", accompanied by additional double digits of posts, ranting and raving about all the reasons NOTHING BUT THIS will be acceptable, or work, or allowable, or approved, or supported, OR RECEIVE ANY OTHER CONSTRUCTIVE SUPPORT.
This has been the majority of contents on the blog since I began to read it. And, it's just getting worse, if anything.
Posted by Old Grouch on May 21, 2007 03:24 PMOG,
Thanks, and I do agree that changing the 14th Amendment would be a HUGE challenge.
I hope we can say that we were able to learn from the mistakes of forced assimilation with the American Indian in attempting to segregate them from the rest of American culture, and then indoctrinating others to not ever speak their native tongue. I would never argue for that. However, with the victor goes the spoils (or so they say) and Mexico did indeed loose the land that is now part of the good ol USA. And since it has been more than 150 years since the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848 and Gadsden Purchase of 1853, the ability to self assimilate into American culture is probably long over-due. I believe that to speak in your "families tongue" is a basic liberty of individual choice, the expectation of others to do so is arrogant and a big waste of money (to me).
I really don't understand the objection of allowing shooting at the border as an option. We have the right to protect our home. If our home is our house, apartment, or our country, we should have the ability to defend it with arms if necessary. And I think it would be a deterrent to anyone if signs were posted, in spanish at the southern border and english and french at the northern border, that those crossing illegally will be shot on sight. If ADT signs in front of houses statistically prevent home invasion, I would rationally assume the same would work at the border. Gated communities have armed guards to prevent criminals from entering. Why would we not do the same at the borders?
I am sorry for those that choose not to listen to the differing opinions. And I have stated many many times in these blogs that I never think it is ok to call names. That solves nothing. But I do want to thank you for writing on this topic. Many of us share a philosophical desire to work this out, understanding that we will need to give a little to get a little.
Posted by Dan2 on May 21, 2007 03:55 PMOn English: we've always had competing tongues in these United States. I think it's a myth that yesterday's immigrants got off the boat speaking English. Immigrant newspapers (i.e., non-English) were quite prevalent in Colorado around the turn of the 20th century (see the basic Colorado general history book--can't remember the authors). German immigrants attempted to form German-only public schools around the country. Simplisms that "they" learned English (yesteryear) or "they" won't learn English (today), ignore the reality of how people assimilate to language and culture--in particular the way different generations approach this. If you have evidence to the contrary, please let me know.
Dan, on shooting people at the border, the main legal objections that come to mind without looking them up are our 8th amendment against cruel and unusual punishment--and probably some treaties we've signed, like the Geneva conventions or the Declaration of Human Rights. And, of course there are likely to be children in the mix.
Posted by anderson on May 21, 2007 04:25 PMAnderson,
Here you loud and clear on English. Those were usually issues with first generation citizens and their parents, not so much 4th and 5th generation (which would be today).
The 8th Amendment is for citizens of the US, and as such would not apply (we as a culture tend to use the Constitution and apply it to those that do not have one, or a different Constitution). The arbitrary killing of people ACROSS the border would indeed go against the declaration of Human Rights, but the Geneva Convention only applies to military personnel or citizens of occupied nations during war, and not in the enforcement of borders or border jumping. The United States, as a sovereign nation, has the right to defend against alien invasion by any means it deems necessary. There are no legal prefaces against such use of force. It is drastic, but could serve the purpose of preventing illegal entry. It would scare the crap out of me, that is for sure (as is the thought of spending any time in a "Mexican jail" if I got arrested in Mexico for anything.
What I fundamentally don't understand is the idea that it is the fault of law enforcement for enforcing laws (breaking up families if you will), instead of the fault of the criminal that has put that family in jeopardy. I am being sincere when I ask someone to please explain this to me? I would very much like to understand the rationale for that opinion, as well as understand what it is based upon.
Posted by Dan2 on May 21, 2007 04:49 PMJohn II
In re:
1) Build a wall and station troops along the border
2) Deport illegal immigrants
3) Prosecute businesses that hire illegal workers
I am with you on 1), disagree on 2) and I am not opposed to but don't think 3) will work.
I regard myself a law abiding person. But, if the choice is sneaking into the US illegally to build a better life for me and my family or condemn my children and grandchildren to the endemic corruption and poverty in Mexico, I would sneak illegally into the US. I would also continue to regard myself a law-abiding and honorable man.
Having said that, no one should profit by the act of illegal immigration. The current legislation offers a "Z" visa to illegal aliens currently in the US. In order to obtain the visa the alien must pay a $5,000 fine, pass a criminal-background check and make a "touch-back" visit to their home country prior to returning. This it seems to me is a reasonable reparation for the crime of illegal entry and authenticates the character of the individual who wants to live among us.
Also consider the practical problem, How do we deport 12 million people? Of course we can deport a lot of them but it is likely the most dangerous will elude and the most reponsible will be trapped.
The "Z" approach seems to me viable because it effectively drys the swamp of the illegal immigrants by removing the responsible voluntarily and thereby leaving the dangerous exposed for who they are. That will ease the practical probems associated with deporting unmanageable numbers.
As for prosecuting businesses: as long as their are too few visas for too many jobs, illegal immigration will remain unmanageable because it is a market driven problem. I don't think it will ever be possible to effectively regulate in opposition to the will of people on both sides of the border.
The fact is that since we need both low-skill and high-skill immigrants, we need more legal ways to enter the country. That is the purpose of the guest worker or "Y" visas the number of which will be calibrated, and adjusted annually, to meet market demands.
I'm all for the wall, troops and border security. But I also think we need to make compromises to the realities extant and develop processes that are consistent with our values as Americans.
Two Mexican 5th graders attacked a lone 2nd grade white kid at Lawrence Elementary school about 3:30 p.m. today 5/21/07.
The two pieces of bacteria came up BEHIND the white kid and attacked him like two hyena's.
The poor little boy didn't have a chance. They threw him to the ground, his head slammed into a very large rock and they proceeded to kick the hell out of him at that point. he was not moving when my hysterical daughter in- law ran to his aid. One lady tried to grab and hold on to the Mexican scum bags, but they over powered her and ran away. Rescue arrived and took the little boy to the hospital he still wasn't moving when they left. They may have killed the litlle child.
This is very similar to the attacks on the western slope when a gang of Mexican girls attacked a white girl and severly injured her.
I guess white kids need to bring armed gaurds to elementary school with them now days. I guess Mexican's and their culture of violence rule now.
Posted by [!!!!!!!] A on May 21, 2007 04:56 PM!!!!:
I'm thinking about forming a militia to hunt down scum like you.
Posted by anderson on May 21, 2007 05:22 PMMr. Jones,,
You said:
But, if the choice is sneaking into the US illegally to build a better life for me and my family or condemn my children and grandchildren to the endemic corruption and poverty in Mexico, I would sneak illegally into the US. I would also continue to regard myself a law-abiding and honorable man."
It doesn't matter what you would regard yourself as; you would still be breaking the law.
"Having said that, no one should profit by the act of illegal immigration. The current legislation offers a "Z" visa to illegal aliens currently in the US. In order to obtain the visa the alien must pay a $5,000 fine, pass a criminal-background check and make a "touch-back" visit to their home country prior to returning. This it seems to me is a reasonable reparation for the crime of illegal entry and authenticates the character of the individual who wants to live among us."
Well, not quite. You are talking about citizenship. But, this bill, as is it is now, would grant immediate legal status to 12 million illegal immigrants.
"Also consider the practical problem, How do we deport 12 million people? Of course we can deport a lot of them but it is likely the most dangerous will elude and the most reponsible will be trapped."
I think that argument is a red herring. We can deport them as we catch them. I think the dangerous are more likely to get caught. Catch a criminal, deport a criminal.
"The fact is that since we need both low-skill and high-skill immigrants, we need more legal ways to enter the country."
That may be true but I also think it's irrelevant to the current debate. I want the borders secured and the illegals deported before we do anything about loosening our immigration policies.
"In order to obtain the visa the alien must pay a $5,000 fine, pass a criminal-background check and make a "touch-back" visit to their home country prior to returning. This it seems to me is a reasonable reparation for the crime of illegal entry and authenticates the character of the individual who wants to live among us."
James Jones, that is an excellent explanation as to why we might allow some undocumenteds to remain. They will have paid reparations for breaking the law just as anyone we jail or fine has paid reparations. If the crime is not so high, we eventually let them go. We don't hold them criminally liability in perpetuity. Of course, some here would evidently like to but then we get into some other issues.
Anderson,
I see your point about the legalities of shooting border jumpers (but wouldn't it be a great deterrent?), and I would certainly not want citizens to have that authority, but for the Border Patrol, and or military personnel only.
NAFTA is a bigoted bill and needs to be amended in my opinion. Being a corporate recruiter, I have to deal with NAFTA frequently enough, and it is SO much easier for a Canadian than a Mexican to qualify. It is fairly insulting.
I would disagree with you on the family issue, but thank you for explaining your reasoning. I sense your compassion, and I feel the same. However, if the parent is the one knowingly putting his or her family at risk, then my compassion then turns to disgust that someone would risk their family, even if the intent was to make a better life for their family. I know and understand that this is a tough thing for anyone to do, and in isolated incidents, I may have compassion. But my compassion runs out when the participants number the tens of millions.
You did ask me about undocumented persons living on my block. Regardless of nation of origin, I would turn them in to the ICE as a concerned and law abiding citizen, and let the justice system work from there. If they did come and take them away, without me knowing they were undocumented, I would feel sad for their situation, and if they were members of my community, that participated in our neighborhood functions and HOA meetings, I would probably try to raise funds to get them "home" to be reunited. If they were not members of the community, but people living in my neighborhood and nothing more, I would probably feel relieved that they were caught, and think about moving to a new area, honestly. I know that is fairly harsh, but that is my reality.
Posted by Dan2 on May 21, 2007 05:31 PMJohn II,
I think I would agree with Anderson on the point that if restitution is made, why not allow a path to citizenship? Unless we are really saying that we want to close the borders completely and allow for no more immigration, period, then I would think that making restitution would be appropriate. Now, if the illegal is using someone else's identity to obtain work, or in some other manner has committed identity theft, unless there was full cooperation resulting in the arrest and conviction of the person(s) that supplied that information, then that is a felony and as such should demand immediate deportation. I would also expect full restitution to the person whose identity was stolen.
I think there is a solid foundation in the immigration bill, and would like to see a little more "common sense" applied as well. But I am not whole-heartedly opposed to allow people to make that restitution to solve the immediate issue of current illegals, and would also put (I don't know if there is), a time limit on availability to do such. If within 6 mos you do not come forward, if you are caught, that is it. One strike and you are out, no opportunity for a second chance.
Posted by Dan2 on May 21, 2007 05:42 PM!!!!!!!!! 4:56
The press will try to bury any story dealing with illegals in any negative light.When they are forced to report they will leave out any reference to immigration status.
It would be so nice to get some unbiased coverage on this.
Maybe Tina Greigo can do a feature story on the playground beating-how about BORDER STREET BULLIES.
Then a nice piece on the illegal that raped his girlfriends 9 year old. She could call it BORDER STREET CHILD MOLESTOR.
Then you have the illegal that dragged his girlfriend to a gruesome death behind his pickup. Tina could title that DRAGGED DOWN BORDER STREET.
I know I'm forgetting more.
Posted by Get Real on May 21, 2007 05:43 PMDan, yes it would be a great deterrent. But so was the Berlin wall. And it was an American president who said, "tear that wall down".
As to families, two points: your scenario (putting his family at risk) speaks only to one way families get involved (the family who crosses the border). At least since the Bracero days (1942-) I imagine we've had people who come here and fallen in love with U.S. citizens or legal residents and vice versa. In this situation, in order to avoid putting his family at risk, you seem to be asking a person to not fall in love, or at least not marry, and then not have any children. That's contrary to human nature. And in any case, children don't have any choice in the matter. Should we punish them for choosing the wrong parents? I'm not saying we should invite people to come here to start families, but we have to take that reality into account.
(2) I wasn't very clear on this before, but I believe a strong family results in strong children and stronger communities. If we break up the family explicitly or de facto, those kids may not be as strong (indeed, there chances of turning dysfunctional are probably greater). That's not good for them, for your neighborhood, or for the community as a whole. A mind is a terrible thing to waste.
Posted by anderson on May 21, 2007 05:48 PMOn walls: I'm reminded that the great cities of old (e.g., London) used to have walls around them, to keep out invaders. As civilization progressed, eventually those walls were not necessary. Are we now regressing because we are unable to deal properly with the movement of people?
Posted by anderson on May 21, 2007 05:54 PMA historical perspective: mass invasions almost always end in the socio-economic destruction of the invaded land. For example:
* The Germanic invasions ended the Roman Empire and started the Dark Ages.
* The Mongol invasions of China resulted in the construction of the Great Wall to rescue Chinese culture.
* The Chinese Invasions of Tibet have destroyed much of traditional Tibetan culture.
These are but a few examples of the damage a mass influx of a single people can have on a society within a short period of time. Personally, I welcome anyone to the U.S. who immigrates legally, but shun those who come here illegally.
The great Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall put it best when he said, "Lawlessness is lawlessness. Anarchy is anarchy is anarchy. Neither race nor color nor frustration is an excuse for either lawlessness or anarchy."
Posted by Welsh Dragon on May 21, 2007 05:54 PMDid the invasion of white settlers destroy America? People have been making those same tired claims about immigrants here for at least 200 years. Maybe it's time we learn something about American history.
Posted by anderson on May 21, 2007 05:58 PMJohn II,
I think it matters a great deal how I regard myself in that I have an obligation to behave morally. Of course I'm a law breaker and so are you but we need persepctive in terms of honour.
I do not think it would be honourable to sacrifice my children's future to my desire remain law-abiding. The honourable man breaks the law in this case to meet the requirements of a higher obligation.
Under the circumstances then the illegal alien is not ipso facto immoral. Of the millions of illegals in the country there are undoubtedly millions or moral men and millions of immoral men.
I want to separate out the two groups and I think this legisaltion is a step in the right direction.
At the end of the day it is adherence to our values that will keep us free and secure.
Posted by James Jones on May 21, 2007 06:10 PMM.A. in European and American History (working on the Ph.D. in the next 2 years as well) with three B.A.s (archaeology, geography, and history). Enough education?
Nearly all historians agree that one of the worst things white settlers did was the 90% death rate of Native Americans by European disease and the imprisoning of Native Americans on reservations. This is most definitely a bruise on American history.
However, the point many pro-immigration supporters miss is that no society can withstand such a massive influx on its societal infrustructure: it WILL crumble. Just think of the Neanderthals vs. our species Homo sapiens: the Neanderthals failed because our species overtook their turf.
Posted by Welsh Dragon on May 21, 2007 06:14 PMOld grouch, I was hoping for something more, but I guess that will have to do. I believe there are several options that have not been explored by our elected representatives. For example: Mexico needs U.S. dollars more than we need Pesos. We have the leverage to direct some change, such as setting up a free industrial zone south of the border where American companies can set up shop and be protected and unmolested. As it stands now most companies cannot or will not venture south of the border due largely to Mexico's political corruption and organized crime. Most of these companies have ventured to Asia and the middle east instead. These companies could produce most of the same goods a lower cost in Mexico.
Second Mexico benefits greatly from the American Tourist industry and NAFTA. We do not have to honor NAFTA nor do we have to support their tourist industry. This is not to say that we need to take such drastic steps, but Mexico is not a part of the current solution and before we start offering citizenship and fencing borders, we should explore other options to force Mexico to take a legitimate role in this solution.
I believe most of the people in congress are only looking for a short term solution that has the appearance of a permanent fix. We have a neighbor to the south that prefers to export it's poor rather than goods and services. Yes, we have a legitimate need for additional low skilled labor. I believe a solution can be found, but I don't believe our elected officials are willing to work that hard to achieve it.
If Mexico won’t come to the table and work with us, then perhaps we need to cut off the supply of American dollars their economy so desperately needs. No, I don’t advocate destroying their economy, but they are purposely harming their own people and expecting the United States to fund the operation. We (United States) like to pretend that we will not stand for such barbaric and sub-human conditions, well here’s our chance to show the world we mean it.
Old Grouch, I’ve been around the block too and I’ve seen very few politicians I trust to do the right thing. I don’t have a problem with legalizing the current crop of Illegal Immigrants, if I can be assured that we will not have to repeat this process again in the next 10 to 15 years. My education tells me we will have to bear a heavy tax burden to integrate such a large uneducated and low-skilled work force into our society. Fine, if that’s what it takes to fix the problem, but there is no economy in the world that can do this every 10 to 15 years and continue to sustain itself….the numbers don’t add up.
Anderson, how many illegal aliens do you want in this country? Why dont we allow all the Russians in? How bout all the Chinese? How bout all the Ethiopians because their countries are really screwed up with outrageous population explosion. Do you really want that to happen to this country? Why is it being sold to the lowest bidder? You really need to get more informed about what is truly happening in this illegal immigration debate. This will truly destroy our country in the next 20 years if nothing is done now. What else do you need to know, except this country will no longer be a functioning society in 20 years. It will be EXACTLY like mexico then. Look how that country is right now and figure it out for yourself. This country will look like a backwater country if immigration is not stopped immediatley!!
Posted by willy on May 21, 2007 06:38 PMThank You Get real! You notice no one really cared I feel very sorry for the childs parents. I'm sure the news will only report it if the child dies and you are right they will leave out the fact that the two perps were Mexican's.
Anderson you are just like the two Mexican's that attacked the kid you are toxic bacteria!! I should hunt your bleeding heart butt down and kick it good for your insensitive comments! If they have killed the kid I'm sure you will find a way to defend them. You must be a disbarred lawyer!!
Posted by [!!!!!!!] A on May 21, 2007 06:42 PMMr. Jones,
"I think it matters a great deal how I regard myself in that I have an obligation to behave morally."
Perhaps, you do. And so do I. If you feel it is morally acceptable to break the law of another nation for the sake of your family, and I feel it's morally acceptable to stop people from streaming across the border and ruining the country for my family, well which morals win that battle? You put your family at risk by subjecting to them to the morals of millions of angry Americans. That's no one else's fault but your own.
Posted by John II on May 21, 2007 06:42 PMUntil we get serious about stopping the flow of illegal immigrates into this country, no program will work, It will only put this same problem on the shoulders of ;the next generation, but they will be dealing with the new 12 million legals voters who recieved amnesty and an additional 50 million more illegals.
SECURE THE BORDER FIRST!!!
Posted by jgd777 on May 21, 2007 06:49 PMAnderson,
I agree that walls suck. But a historical perspective on the Berlin Wall. It was a symbol, as much as anything else, about the philosophical difference between Socialism (under Stalin's definition) and Western Capitalism. It was also the "gateway" to the Soviet Union, and during the cold war was indeed a deterrent, as well as a tool to keep East Germans seperated from West Germans. I don't know that a fence on the Mexican border would do anything to stop illegals from entering illegally.
I understand what you are saying about families. I really do. However, there is a path to citizenship for those that do marry and have children with US citizens, and involves a rather lengthy process, but that is the way it must be done. Look at it from a different perspective. I may have a couple of drinks, not intend to drive, have too many, make a poor choice and drive home. I don't get in an accident, don't kill anyone or do any property damage, but get pulled over as I pull in to my driveway. Should I be arrested for drunk driving? Absolutely. Does it suck? You bet, but that is the law. I could have called a cab, I could have chosen not to drink so much. But instead I broke the law, did not use the resources that are available and paid the price. It could cost me my job, my family, shame, so forth. But that would be a choice.
That is what we are forgetting in this debate. The choice to do it the "right" way, or the choice to break the law. When it is all boiled down, there needs to be punishment for those that break the law, plain and simple. And as responsible peoples, we are implored to break the cycle that leads to illegal entry. Short term solution is to stop the leak and clean up the mess. Long term is how to prevent another leak before we get to a full fledged flood that is out of control. That will take time, and will involve foresight and commitment from, unfortunately, our government. I'm not holding my breath for the long term solution. But the current debated legislation is a great starting point.
Posted by Dan2 on May 21, 2007 06:53 PMWilly,
If you truly would like to see improvement in the immigration debate, please don't post anymore. Calling names and threatening people does not help you with your case.
Your numbers are not provable, so you are going on nothing but feeling. Calling for impending doom does not help in this argument and is based on nothing but fear and bigotry. Calling for sensible laws, rationed and reasoned research and implimentation will resolve this issue. Not talking points and mantra.
You seem like an intelligent person, that probably has served our country, a country that is founded on the ability to discuss and debate, one that is so important the "freedom of speach" was the first right that was established in the Constitution, a document I am sure you have sacrificed for. Please don't tarnish your sacrifice by calling names. Engage in meaningful written dialog and let's see where we can indeed find common ground, or at least common understanding.
Posted by Dan2 on May 21, 2007 07:03 PMAnderson, I served in the military for 9 years. I am proud of this country and will not give up to illegals without a fight. The outh I took was to defend against all aggressors, foreign or domestic. I see these illegals as being outside aggressors, and will deal with them as invaders to my country. This needs to stop NOW
Posted by willy on May 21, 2007 07:06 PMAnderson, I served in the military for 9 years. I am proud of this country and will not give up to illegals without a fight. The oath I took was to defend against all aggressors, foreign or domestic. I see these illegals as being outside aggressors, and will deal with them as invaders to my country. This needs to stop NOW
Posted by willy on May 21, 2007 07:07 PMWilly,
How would you like to see the policy for immigration reform written, and how would you impliment it? I am honestly interested in reading what you have to say, as we agree that something indeed needs to be done.
Posted by Dan2 on May 21, 2007 07:16 PMDan 2, there are an estimated 20 million illegals in this country right now. If they are given an amnesty, that number will immediatley double as they bring their families with them from Mexico! Have you not been reading and following anything besides mainstream media? This will go to about 100 million within 20 years since now, immigration will NOT be controlled by our country. This doesnt concern you?
Posted by willy on May 21, 2007 07:19 PMWilly,
I would also like to hear how you would write the new immigration reform
Posted by jgd777 on May 21, 2007 07:24 PMJohn II,
I have not argued for standing by while millions of aliens stream across the border. The reality is that is precisely what happened and is not acceptable in the post 9/11 world. In any event now we have to deal with the consequences.
Build the wall, send in the troops and do everything possible to cut off the flow. At the same time, drain the swamp - separate out the good from the bad and deport the bad before they commit crimes.
That is more practical, less disreputive and more just then mass deportations.
Posted by James Jones on May 21, 2007 07:24 PMOF course it does, and if you would have read my comments when Anderson first asked what should be done, I responded.
However, the immigration bill as was released and is being debated does not provide amnesty. It allows for restitution and a path to citizenship, which means that all other citizenship is surrendered. There will STILL be policy for legal immigration and will not lead to the doubling of Mexicans in the country.
I would like you to do a couple of things for me if you would, to help me understand your concerns in perspective.
1. Where are you getting your information? I go directly to the source and read the proposed bill.
2. Are you for any legal immigration?
3. As of July 2005 there are 106 million people in Mexico. You are stating that the ENTIRE country will move to the US within 20 years? That seems very unrealistic to me.
I understand your concern. As I stated before something needs to be done long term. But sacrificing a solution that will provide for restitution, or for those that choose not to apply for the z visa, deportation, I am not sure what the real issue is with this starting point?
Posted by Dan2 on May 21, 2007 07:28 PMWilly,
It's not clear to me why you describe this as amnesty. I detailed the requirements for the "Z" visa earlier.
Why is that insufficient or, what would you like to see added or revised?
Posted by James Jones on May 21, 2007 07:28 PMRegardilng shooting people at the borders. Well that sounds good till you have to train young Americans to kill people who are only trying to sneak into the country. Military or border patrol, do you think they want to do this?
Look around the places where you live and pick out one or two young men who you think would do the job. Imagine that young man next door told to shoot to kill illegals.
Often men suffer greatly from killing in war, lets just add more people with PTSD
And what if they are only wounded? What we do in war time is patch them up, whould we do the same to the illegals?
Shoot, repair, let loose. Yep that is a great solution. And Americans being told to shoot to kill children and women and old men coming here for work.
Once we start shooting at the border, how far into the country can we continue shooting to kill?
Can ordinary gun owners help the border patrol with all this shooting? If they are out numbered?.
What if a few brown skinned citizens are killed by mistake? What if you and your family are caught in the cross-fire? Espescially if this spreads from the border.
Still want to shoot a few at the border to deter them?
Posted by Sharon B. on May 21, 2007 07:29 PMJames Jones,
What you say is too simple and makes to much sense. It will never fly, don't you understand this is suppose to be a complicated problem.
Posted by jgd777 on May 21, 2007 07:29 PMdan 2, a moratorium should be placed on immigration for 10 years. Work from the people in our country now. We do have enough folks to work EVERY job in the U.S. without going outside our country. After 10 years, do an allotment that only allows, say 10,000 per year into the U.S., and only based on what is honestly needed. Some companies do not like to pay more than minimum wage, so they wont like this idea. Stop importing people into this country and lets deal with what is going on and fix our own problems first. Finish Iraq, help our own destitute folks, get our country back the proud American way before selling it to the lowest interset. This is my statement of fixing the sorry state our country is in now. And I am an Amreican vet, a voter, and support my country for all, but make that everyone who is legal
lacv
Posted by willy on May 21, 2007 07:30 PMMr. Sanchez,
I don't think we will have to bear a heavy tax burden to integrate such a large uneducated and low-skilled work force into our society.
The low skilled can work in this country and have a better life then acheivable back home and that's what I expect them to do. I see their work as having value and them as being an asset.
Welfare makes wards of all its victims, natives or aliens, and is not a viable means for organizing a community. As we move away from the nanny state immigration will become more, not less, acceptable.
Posted by James Jones on May 21, 2007 07:39 PMSharon B,
No one is seriously thinking about shooting people. Willy may have let his emotions get the best of him. However in some ways you did the same thing. You picked up on one person's rantings and choose to respond in a way that implies that people in this conversation actually agree with his ideas
Posted by jgd777 on May 21, 2007 07:40 PMJames Jones, this is a toatal amnesty. Who is going to make sure all the "so called fines" are paid to the U.S. Government? This is horrible amnesty. The same thing happened in 86 with Kennedy. Do you remember that? I do. I had just gotten out of the military. It sucked than, and it is worse now. There are an estimated 20 MILLION illegals in this country. Most of whom have been arrested on average of 5 times. Do you really want to risk your family to this type of thing? These people are unskilled, cant speak, and will not learn, english, to fit in this country. If this makes me a racist, then, so be it. I will defend my country!
Posted by willy on May 21, 2007 07:42 PMSharon,
I don't even know how to answer your hypothetic scenario. I am sure that there are people who would secure our border, by lethal means if necessary. I can't prove it, but I can say with reasonable certainty. Your scenario's are not realistic. If a citizen was crossing from Mexico or Canada at a non-port of entry, they would be arrested anyway, as there would be no reason not to cross at a port of entry.
Willy,
When the baby boom generation begins to retire in 3 short years, within 5, the shortage of American workers will be 3 million. In 11 years, that number increases by a factor of 4. This does not factor the specializations in Engineering and the Sciences that will not be replaced, as Universities continue to see a decline in those majors. I am a recruiter, it is my job to understand this.
Your scenario would translate roughly into the bankrupcy of the US economy. With a labor shortage here, watch the flood of companies, especially manufacturing, leave the United States.
We can't close the books, we don't repopulate enough.
Posted by Dan2 on May 21, 2007 07:43 PMOk, I'm out. Thanks for some interesting ideas, discussion and debate.
Let's all try to make a point in the future to leave the name calling to those too unintelligent to even know how to type, and stick with reasoned opinion, fact, and compromise.
Posted by Dan2 on May 21, 2007 07:47 PMThat shoot at the border, or haves armed troops there, keeps comming up on these forums.
So it was overkill (pun), hope it made some people think.
Posted by Sharon B. on May 21, 2007 07:50 PMAnderson,
You are probably thing of Hafen & Hafen, Colorado History, a text nearly 4 inches thick in grad school, sort of edited and "distilled" down to an inch, or so, for what used to be a compulsory course for 8th Graders - or at least was compulsory in the District where I taught at the time.
Mr. Sanchez,
IF anyone could be assured that our system of representative democracy would have a permanent - or even very long term - solution to major problems, we would really be living in a different world. We have, so far anyway, managed to slow the cycle of multi-national war down, true; but even there the future hangs by a thread.
We, as Americans, have a tendency to want the "instant coffee" kind of answer; and when we are faced with a long term, or long range, attempt to not only have a successful solution, but also a long term attempt at even arriving at a plan for solution in the first place, it appears - as certainly this line shows - that our frustrations overcome our ability to exercise patience and support a work in progress.
I know that the great majority of people certainly wish it were different; but - again as this line shows - there comes a time when their efforts cease as well, in the face of responses such as can be seen here. I am surprised that some have stayed the course here as long as they have already.
Perhaps the most difficult part of it all is the dichotomy that results in "government" - and those who are in "government" - being both damned if they don't and damned if they do. We elect them; and then don't "trust" them enough to give them a chance when they respond. While at one and the same time we also refuse to "trust" them to respond at all.
And then there are those who don't even try to read - much less comprehend - what one actually does write, say, or mean, while calling the writer things like "scum", or "Commie", for writing, or speaking, at all; or for supposedly "writing, saying, or meaning" something that the name caller imagines they did. And this is just a minor newspaper blog. What does one of our elected governmental leaders do on that level with it?
I would hope for more, and for better, as well. If I had the skill and the ability, I would go back, and try to "cut and paste" from former postings; but computers are a late phenomonon for me; and one I have often felt were of less real use to me than an old fashioned typewriter and filing cabinets. Thank you for your patience, and your consideration for what was there. And thank you for being able to accept whatever differences there be on the adult level of agreement to disagree.
Perhaps we may dialogue again, at a time and place where there may be more light than heat.
Posted by Old Grouch on May 21, 2007 08:02 PMWilly,
I do remember 1986 and if the same thing happens then all this is moot. I have to assume that the laws we pass will be enforced otherwise there's not much point in legislating anything.
Illegal aliens who commit crimes should be punished here and then deported. That has nothing to do with the legislation.
Learning to speak English is a requirement of citizinship. I'm opposed to bi-lingual ballots for that reason.
Your ascribing the characteristics to millions of people doesn't necessarily make you a racist but it certainly evidences bigotry. People should be judged individually, not as member of a larger group, and on the content of their own character.
We all have the duty to defend our country and our home. That's what I'm trying to do too.
Posted by James Jones on May 21, 2007 08:04 PMwilly: "This will go to about 100 million within 20 years since now, immigration will NOT be controlled by our country. This doesnt concern you?"
Dan2: "As of July 2005 there are 106 million people in Mexico. You are stating that the ENTIRE country will move to the US within 20 years? That seems very unrealistic to me."
Ha. Ha. Dan you're too nice.
It goes to show:
No lie too low.
No exaggeration too extreme.
No statistic too stupid.
...for the scary boo boo crowd.
willy, since you shot your mouth off, I'll shoot mine. You're out of the military now but you apparently forgot to stop taking orders. Some ahole on TV is telling you to jump and all you can say is "how high?" (this 100 million figure isn't coming out of anyone's independent calculation, it's coming from con men).
Dan2, I am the baby boomer generation. We need to teach our children to be self-sufficient. This country will be annihilated in 20 year is it isnt done. Where is America to get the money to educate illegals? Why should we pay for their education? Go after Mexico for the money. Obviously, they wont pay cause they dont care. Figure it out. We have about 20 to 25 million illegals in the states today. Dont listen to your newspaper, cause they will NEVER tell you how many are really here. Since there are, what you say, are 125 million, I think you stated, in Mexico right now, if the U.S. passes this amnesty, you will see within 1 year, an additional 20 million. Within 10 years,50 million. This country will hit 400 million people within 40 years!! Most of whom are derelict, and from other countries. Is this the legacy you want to leave to your kids? I am 50 years old, servesd my country in the military for 9 years, and do not want to see the totatl decline this country is headed for. This country will be like Mexico in 20 years if nothing is done now. I am taliking about Tijuan Mexico, not the famous beaches. Please, think about not letting illegals destroy our country
Posted by willy on May 21, 2007 08:04 PMjgd777,
Nice to hear from someone who can distinguish simplicity from simplistic. That's pretty rare talent on this page.
Posted by James Jones on May 21, 2007 08:14 PMOld Grouch, the book I'm thinking of is "Colorado: A History of the Centennial State", Abbott, Leonard, and McComb. I have the 3rd Ed. but there's a newer one out that looks like it's been revised a bit. Actually, I haven't been able to find any other general history book on Colorado (not of the fluff variety), and I've looked. I didn't grow up here which is why I probably haven't encountered the Hardy and Hardy book.
http://www.powells.com/biblio/61-9780870818004-2
Posted by anderson on May 21, 2007 08:15 PMAnderson, let me know how you would like to get hold of me personally, and I will call you
Posted by willy on May 21, 2007 08:16 PMOG: I meant Hafen and Hafen. But if you hafen to know of some other Colorado histories, I'd appreciate hearing of them.
Posted by anderson on May 21, 2007 08:21 PMstill waiting anderson. guess you cant do a personal interview, only on the internet where its safe
Posted by willy on May 21, 2007 08:23 PMAnderson, by the way, I own my own construction company in Denver, and do not hire illegals. I make sure they are legal American citizens.
Posted by willy on May 21, 2007 08:26 PMOld Grouch agree with your last post. You and I tend to disagree at times but rarely disagree with your approach. You definately trust our politicians more than I. But I feel they tend to provoke that distrust with partisan dialogue that ultimately create the type of blogs we see here.
"It goes to show:
No lie too low.
No exaggeration too extreme.
No statistic too stupid.
...for the scary boo boo crowd. "
Anderson your comment I also agree with, but it does come from both sides. Some intentional but a great deal in deciphering the rapid fire comments on here. This creates fights and even when humor is injected can be taken the wrong way.
bwr, I take your point but what do you do in the face of the constant exaggerated claims and stupid statistics? Any advice for dealing with same?
Posted by anderson on May 21, 2007 08:39 PMGuess that shut ole anderson up. This country was built by LEGAL immigrants, not ones who wanted to come here for our money and go home to their own countries. We need to help our own American citizens before we help the world. America cannott continue to sustain the influx of immigrants as it has in the past. We will be overwhelm by so many people. How is this country to help 400 or even 500 million people? This is what we are looking fo in the next 50 years. Think about what it wil be like then. I am glad I will be dead. Most of the younger generation probably will be, too. Our country is a giving country, but we cannot continue to do so to every person in the world. We will falter!! I beg you, dont let this happen!!
Posted by willy on May 21, 2007 08:42 PMAnderson, you are truly an idiot who wont look at any other side but your own, so, I guess you need not be heard from again. BE GONE NAIVE!!
Posted by willy on May 21, 2007 08:46 PMAnderson, I am not the one to ask that question of......LOL I have not been so good at that in the past BUT I am trying to come up with non combative discussion points. Have I been successful? No but getting better! Worse yet I have a dry sense of humor and that does not go well on a format such as this.
You and I disagree alot but feel that we can learn from each other and be civil at same time.
Heck Anderson I spend way too much time researching the stats and comments on here...........Some false, some overstated, some on fence and some true. My feedback has been callous at times. But I have learned alot more in the process and for those that I piss off......sorry just trying to be consistant
Posted by bwr on May 21, 2007 08:52 PMHow come anderson is so stupid?
Posted by martin on May 21, 2007 08:54 PMbwr, more dry humor welcome, but I know it doesn't always translate so well in this medium.
Posted by anderson on May 21, 2007 08:58 PMSTILL waiting for YOUR suggestions, anderson, to fix the illegal immigration debacle.
Seems all you do is deride others for their suggestions without offering any of yours.
Why is that?
Posted by RickyLee on May 22, 2007 10:04 AMAnderson, you never did answer any of my questions yesterday except for calling me a piker. Can you answer the other questions I asked. You seem like you read lots, or at least say you do.
Addressing the Knights of Columbus in 1915, Theodore Roosevelt warned, "The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities."
That is what is guaranteed to happen if a mass amnesty is implemented by our elected traitors.
One of the most controversial points of the bill is the plan to issue illegal immigrants “z visas” that would give them legal working status. The “z visa” would be endlessly renewed as long as its holder paid the associated fines and passed criminal background checks. Critics say the hidden costs associated with giving low-skilled workers “z visas” would cost taxpayers trillions. For this reason Robert Rector, a Heritage Foundation senior research fellow, said “this is the most expensive bill the U.S. taxpayer has ever seen.”
Rector explained, “Every person that gets the Z visa, and that would be about 12 million people, 9 million of which are adults--is immediately eligible for Social Security. They start to contribute to that system. They start to earn eligibility for Medicare. The White House has claimed they don’t get welfare benefits. That is absolutely untrue. For the first 10 years or so they are in the country, the adults would not get welfare benefits, but the children would. They are going to be here for fifty years. For the first 10 years they don’t get means tested welfare, but for the next forty they are going to be eligible for every single type of means tested welfare.”
Rector said it would cost the government $2.4 trillion to pay out these benefits to z visa holders. He characterized the bill as an “amnesty bill with a blank check on the U.S. taxpayer.” Entitlement programs, like Social Security and Medicare programs, are already on pace to go bankrupt due to the exploding costs of retiring baby-boomers. Rector said adding the additional retirement costs of a low-skilled population to these programs would be a “financial catastrophe.”
Writing for National Review Online, Byron York states, "Rector found that in 2004, the most recent year for which figures are available, low-skill households received an average of $32,138 per household--the great majority in the form of means-tested aid and direct benefits.... Against that, Rector found that low-skill households paid an average of $9,689 in taxes.... In the final calculation, he found, the average low-skill household received $22,449 more in benefits than it paid in taxes..."
According to World Net Daily, "If the lower figure of 12 million illegal aliens is used for estimation purposes, the [current] total tax burden translates to $2.2 trillion."
Let’s see if I have this right.
To get to the White House, one needs great buckets of money and favors.
Corporations are the biggest donors, and can bestow favors, host debates, and do the marketing of candidates.
CEOs are required to
- increase shareholder value
- increase revenue
- decrease costs
- focus on quarterly profit results
We had Taylor’s “Scientific Management” which led to dumbing jobs down, homogenizing jobs, and via “downsizing” and “rightsizing” finally we got to “Business Process Reengineering”. Then to keep lowering costs, we did “Outsourcing” and “Co-sourcing” and once all the jobs that can be moved offshore have been sent away, the final part is to bring in people from unstable third-world countries who because of instability at home and questionable status here, will work for slave wages and conditions.
We react to this by blaming the illegal (scab) workers, and getting into an argument about border security. Then we blame the “liberals” and tar them as soft on crime and closet commies, and we vote for people funded by the commercial sector who promise to “get tough” and maybe fund a “war” on something or other.
Makes perfect sense to me, it must be those scummy alien-hugging liberals and those God-hating commie unions.
Why, I ask myself, do they hate America so?
Now, I need to go off to Walmart to buy me an American flag (made in China), fill up my Hummer (built by foreign workers) with good American gas (from Saudi Arabia), and do some trading. Now that Hershey has lowered its costs by sending jobs offshore, I think I will put a few thou into them. Need to pull stock out of Chrysler though, they just don’t seem to understand the global economy.
Posted by Bingo Skunk on May 22, 2007 10:26 AMJay, do you really want to know what I think, or does it matter cause you already know what you know? I ask b/c you throw a bunch of garbage out there (speaking particularly of yesterday's claims) and ask me to pick it apart. Rector's claims deserve to be addressed but anything from worldnetdaily is unreliable, period.
Rector's rhetoric: "the most expensive bill..ever" and "a financial catastrophe" or "a blank check" should be a clue up front that you're getting a snow job. People in Congress aren't stupid, and though they can and will make mistakes, they're not going to support something that will result in financial catastrophe.
His arguments about welfare and Social Security are flawed. Can you tell why? Tell me something about how Social Security works. He paints this picture of everyone going on welfare when we know immigrants have traditionally used fewer social services, not more. It's the same sort of meritless argument that's made about blacks.
Posted by anderson on May 22, 2007 10:38 AMAnderson, 1 simple question then, because I have not seen the answer. Where does the $5,000 for the so-called Z visa go?
and for !!!!!! I have not been able to find a single story anywhere about the Arvada elementary school you mentioned earlier.
Jay, it probably goes into the govt's coffers. I don't understand what you're getting at with the question. Clarify if you will.
Posted by anderson on May 22, 2007 11:59 AMJust wondering if it would be used to shore up social security, go to the INS, DHS, IRs, or some other alphabet soup agency. Or if it would go towards the defecit, or funding the agency that handles the LEGAL immigration, or something else. $5,000 is a small price to pay for one to become legal without going through the hoops that so many have been through to gain citizenship in the past. That doesn't even take into account the time and effort involved with those who have tried to come here legally. I hate people who try to croud in line in front of me at movies, car wash, buffet, etc... dont you?
Posted by Jay on May 22, 2007 12:07 PMThe $5,000 could go in a general fund or it might be earmarked for DHS, since they are backlogged in processing naturalization applications.
Immigrants are going to bolster Social Security, not break it. Disabuse yourself of that notion. We need immigration (on average younger than the general population) to help keep it solvent in the future.
Grousing about who's standing in front of who in the line, isn't very practical if you have a broken line to begin with.
Posted by anderson on May 22, 2007 12:20 PMBecause, anderson, even if only half of the illegal immigrants in this country
(6,000,000?) cough up the five grand, that's 30 BILLION yankee dollars.
Do you think that's money well spent if it goes
into "the govt's coffers"? Why not earmark that money for say, EDUCATION?
And, you've proven my point; that you don't offer any ideas to improve the situation, instead just complaining about others' opinions.
Last chance.
What do you think will improve the illegal immigration debacle?
Posted by RickyLee on May 22, 2007 12:22 PMAnswer your own question, RickyLee.
You've shown me that you have trouble comprehending even simple ideas I've written about before. In any case, if you're actually interested in my ideas for improving immigration, rather than, say, taunting me, you can find them on this thread (and others).
The other day I read some opinion piece about how the reason the Feds want all the illegals to become legal is to get them to pay social security taxes and such. They need the new infusion of cash to help support the retireing baby boomers. I don't know how much of that is true. I do know many of the recent marchers have said they have been paying taxes all along, but how could they be if they are here illegally? They would have had to use someone elses SSN to do so.
Posted by Jay on May 22, 2007 12:43 PMJay, many places that hire illegals pay the SS tax deduction into the bogus SSN, but the illegal can never claim.
So there are already billions being paid into SS that will never be claimed and help to serve the people who can.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ignore Anderson..
My granddaughter is in 5th grade at Lawrence Elementry in Arvada..Hasn't heard anything...it may be hush-hush.
Let us know what you hear. I will too.
Although some have false SSNs, many have taxpayer ID numbers, which the federal govt has been encouraging them to get for years. That's why there's unclaimed money at Social Security now.
Besides Social Security and income tax, undocumented immigrants pay sales taxes just like all of us, and (directly or indirectly) property taxes, just like all of us.
If they are brought above ground, more people will contribute FICA taxes, and, as I mentioned earlier, a supply of younger people (not just today but in the future) will help fund Social Security. The opinion your read sounds accurate except this isn't *the* reason for immigration reform. There are many reasons.
Thanks 12:51 & Anderson, I was referring only to income taxes though.
Posted by Jay on May 22, 2007 12:56 PM12:52 I talked to my daughter-inlaw and she tried to talk to a staff member in the office but the staffer got nervous and whispered to her that there were "to many" people around to discuss it. Probably hush hush with all the anti-illegal sentiment going around!!! ( Gee, I wonder why???)
But she said the two scum bags were reportedly going to have assult charges filed against them!!.
When the daughter-in-law picked up our two grandkids today, she said there were ALOT of teachers out on the grounds at the end of the day which isn't a normal routine for them.
You might ask your daughter (if she picks up her child after school that is) if she noticed any strange activity...my daughter-in-law still doesn't know the condition of the beaten child.
Some one at the beginning of these comments said to ignore Anderson, it's to bad people didn't take that persons advice. I believe Anderson runs Mexican brothel and is afraid he going to lose the chiquitas he pimps out!! He shows WAAAAAY too much sympathy for illegals and is un-American in his attitudes. Thanks for your interest 12:52
If I hear anything about the poor child that was attacked by those toxic Mexicans I will let you know.
Posted by [!!!!!!!] A on May 22, 2007 05:49 PMPeople like you are a plague on our communites, you lying piece of s__.
Posted by anderson on May 22, 2007 06:34 PMTo.!!!!!!!! 5:49pm.
My grandaughter said she heard that it was a
6th grader that got beat up (????)
That's all she knows.
Do you know...it was a Mexican from Mexico..
Or a anchor baby.... Mexicans that are here illegally and had a baby,born in America to stay here.? Because... I hope it wasn't a American Citizen from spanish-decent, a
chicano..chicana..During this illegal invasion I had conversations w/ friends that I had known for 30yrs. One a caucasion,the othera african-american. I expressed my outrage with all the 'demands' last yr. and this yr. They told me 'I thought you were mexican.(!?)
I said what!? I'm American-from spanish decent...5th generation american from New --Mexico. Most of us are light skinned (I'm mistaken for Italian) (except for Gov. Bill Richardson from New Mex.) I've been in Denver ALL (our) Lives. So, I hate to be mistaken for a MEXICAN. We don't even speak spanish. Can understand it, and can speak a few words. Mexicans do not like us spanish Americans..because we are Americans. We get 'lumped' together w/ Mexicans. As 'Hispanics' We are the 'hispanics'.They are MEXICANS. Two diffrent nationalities. We are in the middle of
mexican and white. Yet our birth certificates say "WHITE". Thanks..
Good advice T!
Posted by truthy on May 23, 2007 06:24 AMRegarding Lawrence elementary in Arvada. I called the school and they said that Monday 3 6th graders were in a fight, 911 was called, 1 kid was taken to the hospital, he was apparently back in school the next day. It was not 2 5th graders pounding a 2nd grader as !!!!!!! has indicated. I asked them to put out an official report publicly to end the speculation and race baiting. We'll see if anything comes out today.
Posted by Jay on May 23, 2007 08:37 AMAccording to my daughter-in law who witnessed the attack while waiting for her children..... the one boy who was attacked was small in comparison to the other two attackers!
My daughter-in law said the two bigger scum bag boys ran away and there was no doubt of their ethnicity! I will take an eye witness account over anyones else's account of the story.
The police took her statement as a witness and said they will notify her when charges are filed.
IF IT IS TRUE. I am relieved to hear that the victim is ok.
My daughter in-law said it was such a vicious attack she is amazed to hear that the victim was in school the next day and has serious doubts about that.
The school is obviously downplaying the incident!!!! One of these days a kid is going to be killed by one of these Mexican hoodlums! These people are outrageous!!
Anderson if I'm such a liar why don't you call Lawrence Elementary and ask them about the whole nasty incident. Maybe they will give you the truth (you being so sympathetic to the Mexican cause)I'm skeptical about what the school will say concerning this attack.
Anderson people like you should get back to posting your un-American sympathetic Mexican bulls**t
Posted by [!!!!!!!] A on May 23, 2007 10:02 AMI'd like to see the police report.
Posted by Jay on May 23, 2007 11:10 AM!!!!: every time I read one of your posts, I feel dirty all over.
Posted by anderson on May 23, 2007 12:01 PMArvada police have no record of an incident at Lawrence elementary school this week.
Posted by Randi on May 23, 2007 12:20 PM!!!!!!!How did you come to the conclusion that they were 'mexicans' from 'mexico' or 'illegal'?
My daughter didnt see any mexicans at the carnival this past saturday. She said she may have seen one mexican family at the carnival.. So, she's 'just wondering' how you came to that conclusion...What we discuss and are concerned about is the prejudice toward us spanish-american citizens. We're Americans..now some white people are against us thinking we are Mexicans and Mexicans are against us because we are Americans. We are 'in the middle'. And as far as teenagers there are light and dark skin in our family, and only one wears baggy pants, and he's the dark complection...so if YOU would see him YOU would think he was a gang member and he's not..just the style,he doesn't want to look like pee-wee herman amoung peers. He's a good kid, goes to school, and never gets into trouble. So..its easy to judge without really knowing.