Why illegal aliens are criminals
I hear the illegal aliens claiming they are not criminals. Perhaps they do not understand what a criminal is and someone can translate this for them: A criminal is someone who breaks the law.
These people broke the law by coming here illegally. They break the law by working illegally. If they bought false papers in order to work, that is fraud, and the person who made the false papers is guilty of forgery. The person who bought the false papers is guilty of conspiracy to commit forgery. If those papers happened to include a valid Social Security number belonging to someone else, that is ID theft. If they are paid in cash, off the books, that is tax evasion. When they drive without a license and insurance, that is breaking the law. When someone breaks that many laws, that makes them criminals.
I also hear the moans about “breaking up families” when someone is deported. I don’t know how many people currently residing in our jails and prisons are parents, but they are suffering the consequences of their actions, and the kids are paying too. At least these people who are deported have an option to take their kids with them; those Americans in prison for fraud, conspiracy, forgery, etc., don’t have that option. It is not the law that “breaks up families” it is the lawbreaker. Let’s get real.
Florence Michael, Denver
Very well put Florence. I'm sure you realize when it comes to your lawmakers they only respond to the loudest voice and right now they only hear the people marching in the street demanding rights.
Posted by Pauline Mayes on May 15, 2007 02:09 AMI keep hearing of rights, what about responsibilities. If you want the right to work here, you have the responsibility to come here legally and through the proper channels. If you want to work here, you have the responsibility to pay taxes and have the proper documentation, that’s yours, not stolen or forged. If you want the right to keep your families together, you have the responsibility to not break the law and live civilly within our society.
Posted by Dan Williamson on May 15, 2007 03:30 AMNicely done. Seems pretty simple to me. Unfortunately, you will probably be labeled as a racist. People often forget that illegal immigrants can be from anywhere, not just Mexico. A European or Canadian that is here illegally is also a criminal.
Posted by BO on May 15, 2007 05:04 AMWhile I agree everything Florence Michael said in her letter, I want to know when we (the people) are going to raise a stink about the illegal employers - those folks who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. I can accept an employer of say 100 employees who follows current Federal laws (getting a copy of either their social security card or 'green card' & forwarding it to the appropriate authority) having 5 or fewer illegals because those illegals have good paperwork, but when an employer (like Swift, for example) has more than half its work force made up of illegals, there is no way on the planet that employer should be allowed to plead ignorance.
A few years ago, when WalMart was fined $11 million dollars, the government bragged that it was the largest fine they had ever collected for hiring illegals. While true, that same year, WalMart made over $285 BILLION dollars, so the fine was an accounting 'rounding error' - less than 4/100s of 100% of their income for the year. To put it in perspective, it's roughly the same as charging a speeder a penny per mile over the posted speed limit - hardly a deterrent.
First, we need to boycott those companies which hire illegals (eg: stop buying Swift products - for at least a year). Second, have a meaningful fine structure for companies caught hiring illegals & doing businesses with contractors which hire illegals - how about 5% of gross income for first offense, 10% for second offense & add prison time for upper management for 3rd offense. Finally, add a restriction that prohibits any company which hires illegal aliens from doing business with ANY government entity (local, state & federal) say for 1 year for the first offense, 5 years for second offense.
If there were no jobs for illegal immigrants, the flood would slow to a trickle, and the only way to stop businesses from hiring them is to make it economically cheaper to hire citizens or legal immigrants.
I understand that this may cause certain goods & services to go up in price; however, I believe that with more legal immigrants & citizens making better wages (not to mention having to work multiple jobs just to make ends meet), we would all be better off. In addition, cutting off the the source of remittances to home countries of illegal immigrants just might force those home countries to take care of their own citizens instead of counting on those remittances to take care of them (in point of fact, for Mexico, home country of over 50% of those illegal immigrants, cash sent home from the US is the 2nd largest 'cash crop', so it is no wonder they provide their citizens with ways to cross the border illegally ).
During the upcoming elections, we need to question not only what the candidates would do about the illegal immigrants, but equally (at least) important is what they would do to the illegal employers. Start now by writing, calling and/or emailing your representatives, since I understand they are attempting to come up with a 'comprehensive immigration plan' . We need to make sure that the companies (and individuals) which hire illegal immigrants don't get any kind of 'pass' for creating the problem.
Posted by Mary on May 15, 2007 05:07 AMWell said Florence! It's too bad more people don't "get it", the real issue, which is that these illegal aliens making their demands are breaking our laws!
Posted by Geraldo on May 15, 2007 05:31 AMwarning.....posting here will get you nowhere except to an Argonaut liquor ad...tequila anyone?
Posted by derr on May 15, 2007 05:31 AMI agree with Florence. Illegal Aliens who break the law should not be granted amensty for breaking those laws, they should pay for the crimes committed. People that are defending the illegal aliens in this country, probably have never dealt with thier identities stolen by them, have their credit ruined because it or going through years with the IRS, because of the stolen SS card.
I am sure once Anderson gets here, everyone that agrees with Florence will be damned. I am surprised that Anderson has already made a post to this letter.
Don't you guys know we don't need laws? No human being is illegal, and borders are so last century. All we need is a middle class to work and pay taxes into the system so people like anderson won't starve to death.
But wait! The middle class is just a bunch of bigots and xenophobes! We can't have that, but we do need their money...well we will find someone to care for us after they are gone...right?
Posted by truthy on May 15, 2007 06:54 AMTancredo is our only answer to law breakers. He needs your vote and your money.
Excellent post Florence. All of it true.
Want to know who is hiring illegal aliens? Go to Wehirealiens.com, they list companies by state that have been turned in by Americans and other businesses.
Posted by P on May 15, 2007 07:11 AMWe all know this same old song and dance.The problem is we are not being heard.We are being ignored.
The Democratic convention is coming to Denver.
Wouldn't that be a good time for our voices to be heard?They keep saying they are going to do right by this country.They keep saying they will have accountability and openess in their party.They keep saying they represent us.
So if the Democrats have control of the House and Senate and want control of The White House we need to be heard.
Start bombarding all Democratic leaders with e-mails and phone calls now.When they get to Denver we need to get a huge protest together and let them know loud and clear,NO AMNESTY,START FINING AND SHUTTING DOWN EMPLOYERS WHO HIRE ILLEGALS,START DEPORTATIONS, AND CLOSE THE BORDER,STOP ISSUEING VISAS TO ANYONE UNTIL THEY START CLAERING OUT ILLEGALS AND MAKING ROOM FOR PEOPLE WHO COME HERE LEGALLY! Just put a sign up. NO VACANCY.
Posted by Can I get an AMEN! on May 15, 2007 07:13 AM"A criminal is someone who breaks the law."
Wow! How...profound...
Parking illegally is breaking the law...
Raise your hand if you're a criminal!
Posted by Charles B on May 15, 2007 07:31 AMIt's criminal the way people ignore the War in Iraq and focus on illegal immigrants.
Posted by just sayin on May 15, 2007 07:32 AMCan't you focus on more than one issue at a time?
Posted by Just Sayin Too on May 15, 2007 07:40 AMI see the majority who wrote to this post don't like illegal imms. and think they are breaking the law.Well why is it the people voted the dems. in that made Denver a sanctuary city which is breaking the law.These dems are breaking the law.What don't you get?Just like when the dems. say we are not fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq.Asked our troops who they are fighting in Iraq.Asked the troops if the dems are supporting them.Vote the criminals out.It's documented fact that clinton is responsible for 9/11 just like the uneducated voters who voted the corrupt,incompetent in.
Posted by Keith on May 15, 2007 07:45 AMPoliticians want to award AMNESTY to illegal immigrants so they can supply CHEAP LABOR for American business.
Unfortunately, US TAXPAYERS subsidize the cost of this CHEAP ILLEGAL LABOR by:
(1) paying for public education for children of illegals
(2) paying for translations services in courtroom and hospital settings
(3) paying to house illegals in correctional facilities
(4)paying higher insurance rates as illegals drive unlincensed and uninsured
(5)paying the price of inferior educations for English speaking students in public schools. Teachers are distracted by attending to students who speak English as a second language
(6)paying the price of overcrowded roads and highways
(7)paying the price of deterioating home values as illegals crowd into rentals units and Section 8 public housing
(8)paying the price of additional crime and youth violence. Illegals return to their home countries and can not be extradited to the US to face criminal charges
(9)paying the price of more disease in this country and the re-emergence of diseases we have not had for some time. Illegal immigrants do not pass health screenings required of legal immigrants
(10)paying the price of overcrowded emergency rooms and hospitals that are closing due to the influx of illegals that are receiving free medical care
Diversion, it's a nice debating tactic, Charles. Fortunately, there are those of us who know the tactic!
Charles, when you park illegally and get caught, you suffer the consequences (fines).
The consequences of entering this country illegally and getting caught is deportation.
Pretty simple concept!
I totally agree with all the comments against the illegals. Sad to say Harry Reid (Democrat) is pushing for amnesty this week.
The Democrats and some turn-coat Republican's, John McCain for example, are going to vote on "comprehensive reform" which is total amnesty. It will probably pass and we will have 12-20 million illegal aliens shoved down our throats.
I am sure people like Truth and Anderson will be thrilled.
La Raza will send them their checks for being good little spokesman for the illegals.
Remember Democrat's LOVE the illegals and will vote for amnesty.
We will be voting for a new president in 2008
REMEMBER which party is going to give 12-20 million (maybe more) illegals an amnesty they DO NOT DESERVE!!
Vote anyway but, Democrat!!!!!! Vote for the Independent, or libertarian candidate, etc. look up the politicians voting record and see who voted for amnesty!!!!
If the candidate you like voted for amnesty DO NOT vote for him/her.
Posted by A on May 15, 2007 07:59 AMA, you will see so many of these posts come from people who refuse to do any research and they put out idiotic opinions base on lies.
Posted by Keith on May 15, 2007 08:17 AMYEA...YEA... Florence , that is EXACTLY the problem we have with these CRIMINALS !!
I cannot understand why ... LEGAL MEXICANS, abet this behavior. They should want our country free of this riff raff also !!!
Parading around protesting OUR LAWS only makes most of us angry enough to stand up and fight against you !!!
Go home, make your country a better place, & of course TAKE YOUR KIDS WITH YOU !!!!
Posted by M on May 15, 2007 08:18 AMDavid DiBello
440 West 41st Street, Apt
New York, NY 10036
(646) 275-7534 / (732) 262-9229
daviddibello32@yahoo.com
“Better Life Not A Crime”
Immigration is on deck this week on Capitol Hill as the government tries yet again to form a cohesive policy for a problem being addressed 11 million people too late. In 1992 we had about one million uninvited guests, but this gate crashing wasn’t perceived a problem until day laborers showed up on front lawns and shopping centers of suburbia. Previously the inner cities were where they belonged so we could ignore, like we do with the homeless.
Liberals proclaim “it’s a small world after all,” and believe we should be neighborly, making America everyone’s Mister Rogers. A world without borders is wonderful if this was heaven, but in a pragmatic world fearing terrorism, it reeks of irresponsibility. The Statue of Liberty greets all who dream of freedom and prosperity, but a realistic appraisal would be our cup doth run over, and money doesn’t grow on trees.
Pure Republicans don’t want to get too hasty in chasing out the undocumented because they supply a source of work whose wages are illegally substandard. Their concern is in keeping costs down for day laborers, live in nannies, day care and migrant workers. Who wants to pay more for home improvement, strawberries and gardening when they can pay $3 an hour off the books? Our health care and education systems are being weighed down by non paying illegals, yet we save on other services which seem like an offset. What happens in the year 2020, when these undocumented people retire, having no FICA credit let alone SS #?
Propaganda states the jobs offered are those Americans refuse to do, yet this past holiday season Disney offered jobs to dress as cartoon characters for $10 an hour and health care coverage and got an overwhelming patriotic response. It seems “good pay rules.”
Conservative legislators argue rounding up and shipping out illegals, unrealistic since we do not have the manpower, our National Guard being split between problems at home and a war overseas. To increase their size would mean additional funds. i.e. taxes, and well, they are conservatives.
Their one argument that gives a self righteous pause is “entering this country undocumented is a felony.” In addition to homegrown murderers, thieves and rapists we are adding people who never R.S.V.P.’ed us to the list of most heinous. Actually they received no invitation since coming to this country is limited mostly to those who have relatives here, or a legal job waiting, no matter what the Lady in the Harbor says.
If we could contact our great grandparents they would tell us how pretentious we are, and what extremes they would have tried to enter this country as safe haven away from famines, plaques and tyranny of their homelands. Just this week we had a boat capsize with refugees from Cuba, which shows people will risk their lives to seek financial and personal freedom. Their desires are no different from our forefathers, and their intentions should not be seen as criminal, but it is, which is par for the course from a country that once thought criminal people of color using the same sanitary facilities, restaurants or transportation.
If access to our country were made easier (decriminalizing people who yearn to be free), we wouldn’t have people risking their lives to enter, except for those who still wouldn’t qualify due to criminal conviction. A fence or moat would solve that problem, or we could simply round them up and jail or deport them, since they would then be the only ones trying to enter illegally.
The correct measure is to process and document illegals so we know who is here, and pay them the right salary so they become productive tax paying members of society, and in turn pay for the services they use. We seem to point the finger at immigrant cost, than the wages being denied, and call them criminal while we take advantage of them. It’s seems easer to blame the victim than solve the problem.
DAVID...The CORRECT way to handel ILLEGALS... is to KEEP THEM OUT IN THE FIRST PLACE...not CODDLE THEM !!!
Posted by M on May 15, 2007 09:06 AMDavid DiBello,
Thank you for providing some voice of reason, and sound judgment, to this otherwise raucous clamor. We can but hope that Congress will take heed; and make at least a basic effort to deal with the complexities, rather than merely surrendering to the cry of the mob.
Posted by Old Grouch on May 15, 2007 09:12 AMDid some say race war? Sweet!!!!!
Posted by Eric Cartman on May 15, 2007 09:16 AMMary, Bingo!
If employers weren't taking advantage of illegals (extortion) by paying them sub standard wages (they couldn't complain) then under the rules of supply and demand, people wouldn't come here undocumented since there would be no jobs.
As I stated, Americans aren't doing their jobs because of the illegal sub standard pay. They would do their jobs if the pay were $10 an hour or better with health care coverage.
We could thank our next 9/11 because we didn't want to enforce laws because we wanted cheap goods and services more.
As for M, Alexander Hamilton was born in the Carribean, and the only "real Americans" are indians (Native Americans).
Posted by David DiBello on May 15, 2007 09:17 AMI wrote a letter to Gavin Newsome, Mayor of San Francisco regarding sanctuary policy - here's his reply:
Thank you for contacting my office recently with your thoughts and ideas
regarding San Francisco’s status as a Sanctuary City. We always appreciate
hearing from pro-active people like yourself.
Since the time of the Gold Rush, immigrants have come to San Francisco from
every country in the world, opening businesses, creating jobs, paying
taxes, taking leadership in government, and rebuilding San Francisco after
the 1906 and 1989 earthquakes. Today 1 in 3 San Franciscans were born
overseas and are a vital part of our economy and culture
In my first Executive Directive of 2007, I reaffirmed the City and County
of San Francisco’s commitment to its Sanctuary City status, originally
established in 1989. As a Sanctuary City, San Francisco has and will
continue to provide compassionate services to all immigrants, regardless of
status. I want to make it clear that no city resources will be used in
immigration detention or arrest proceedings unless required by federal law.
When certain people are targeted and denied access to vital social
services, the health and safety of the entire city is compromised. .
Federal immigration raids are hindering the well-being of San Francisco.
Countless crimes have gone unreported over concerns that by contacting
local police, good citizens could put their family and livelihood at risk.
This risk also encourages parents from sending their children to school or
seeking medical treatment when in desperate need of care. We can not,
under good conscience, endorse any policy that would be counter-productive
to affluence of working families.
San Francisco joins with over 20 other cities, including Detroit, New York,
Boston, and Chicago, by continuing its traditional role as a Sanctuary
City. I strongly oppose any effort to require public safety officials,
teachers, doctors, and any other City employee to report the immigration
status of anyone seeking help.
Thank you again for contacting me. I hope together that we can create
common-sense immigration policy that will benefit everyone.
Sincerely
Gavin Newsom
Mayor
Mr. DiBello,
I want to second what the self appointed leader of these discussions and voice of reason in the wilderness, Mr. Old Grouch said. He is the very model of restraint and sanity and the keeps angry pitchfork wielding villagers like me from persecuting the downtrodden.
You see, evil middle class white men like me, have never done anything good for anyone, and because we have big beautiful houses, new cars, loving wives and good friends we need to be put in our places. Mr. Old Grouch is doing just that. With his obvious superior intellect and mastery of the English language, he has vanquished our arguments at every turn. He has approved of you. You should be honored.
Wouldn't indians be native indians,since there was no America until settlers and white people came here 2nd.?
Posted by on May 15, 2007 09:26 AMI'd like to see the tax code and immigration laws enforced with equal vigor. I bet there are far more tax cheats than illegal aliens.
Posted by Liam on May 15, 2007 09:38 AMDon't worry Liam. I pay my full taxes every year. Now you won't have to worry where your next meal will come from.
Posted by truthy on May 15, 2007 09:41 AMtruthy - don't know what your taxes have to do with my meals...whatever. Is that supposed to be a joke or something? Didn't get it.
As a loyal American legally paying his required taxes, doesn't it bother you that illegals are costing you and tax cheats are costing you even more??
Would you like to reduce law enforcement in these areas and pay even more?
American DO NOTHING TO BENEFIT AMERICAN CITIZENS politicians= downfall of America!!
Illegal aliens= downfall of America!!
Hiring illegal aliens= downfall of America!!
Far left socialists(Hollywood dingbats included)= downfall of America!!
Large companies outsourcing American jobs= downfall of America!!
Very LIBERAL public schools and colleges with far left teachers and pathetic far left professors ( Ward Churchhill prime example!)= downfall of America!!
Home grown Muslim Terrorists and converted not so patriotic American's= downfall of America!!!
Very liberal media outlets Newpapers, TV, paid liberal internet bloggers= downfall of America!!
Liberal judges and D.A.s... example: Mary Lacy. Boulder's incompetant D.A.
Charles B. Sharon B.( who posts one liners which are usually gross in nature) Old Grouch, Truth, Anderson, and the other lefties, I am not interested in your insults and name calling, but, go ahead if it makes your day!
Posted by A on May 15, 2007 09:51 AMThe illegal alien credo, "Laws...we don't need no stinkin' laws!"
Posted by QBT on May 15, 2007 09:53 AMKeith
"Just like when the dems. say we are not fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq."
Really? Care to provide a quote?
and then:
"A, you will see so many of these posts come from people who refuse to do any research and they put out idiotic opinions base on lies."
Hello kettle, meet the pot.
Posted by on May 15, 2007 09:58 AMCharles B,"Parking illegally is breaking the law... Raise your hand if you're a criminal!"
Once again Charles you've graced us with your equivocal understanding of the laws of this land. Do yourself a favor and learn the difference between a federal immigration law and a traffic violation. A non-moving traffic violation at that.
I guess carjackers and jaywalkers are the same in your mind???
Posted by KW on May 15, 2007 10:00 AMTruthy,
Why does trying to correct an injustice mean "white men" are horrible creatures?
Be proud of hard work, accomplishments and successes, which should include providing for family, caring for friends, and giving back to the commuinty/country that gave you so much opportunity.
If you do that, you are truly blessed, because "whatsoever you do to the least of my brother, that you do unto me." A spiritual way of having compassion, and not forgetting the people you pass on the way up the ladder, and counting your own personal blessings.
If I asked you "what do you need more of, actions or words?" the answer should be both, because we need to be shown we are loved, and reinforced we are loved.
So when someone suggests righting an injustice for people who "thirst to be free," that doesn't mean other people are evil.
Posted by David DiBello on May 15, 2007 10:02 AMMr. DiBello,
Uh ..... thanks?
Truthy
Posted by truthy on May 15, 2007 10:07 AMIt's criminal the way people ignore the War in Iraq and focus on illegal immigrants.
Posted by just sayin on May 15, 2007 07:32 AM
During the Vietnam War, Congress met for 3 days to discuss the amount of sugar in cereal being marketed to kids. Young Americans dying for no good reason and these chumps are talking about cereal. Sad and pathetic.
Posted by Maximum R&B on May 15, 2007 10:40 AM"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in GOOD FAITH(LEGALLY) becomes and American and ASSIMILATES himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in EVERY FACET AN AMERICAN, and NOTHING but an AMERICAN.
There can be NO DIVIDED ALLEGIANCE here! ANY man who says he is an American, but SOMETHING ELSE also, ISN'T an American AT ALL!
We have room for but ONE FLAG, the AMERICAN FLAG! We have room for but ONE LANGUAGE here, and that is the ENGLISH language! And we have room for but ONE SOLE LOYALTY and that is a loyalty to the AMERICAN PEOPLE!"
Theodore Roosevelt
President of the United States
Keith, my boy, you are courting expulsion. Big Brother is watching. The moderator provides, like cross examination mandates a large berth, the posters in this forum are accorded freedom to say nearly anything they so desire but there is a limit. You are about to be stricken from this forum. You need to chill out and comport yourself accordingly.
We will miss you. Sharon enjoys a good laugh in reading your posts; Old Grouch good naturedly singles you out for ridicule. I am singled out for ridicule; however, my response is not vulgarity or insult; I just hit 'em with chunks of silence.
I'll prophesy that one more vulgar outburst from you will result in your suspension from this forum as the moderator's paitence with you will have run out. Posting the same opinion five times is abuse of this forum. Me, your friendly deicide chosen to drain the swamp of repression gods create.
Posted by Richard Grimes Risen Ape r22037@yahoo.com ffrf.org on May 15, 2007 10:55 AMThe Indians of the frontier, the Irish, the Italians, the Chinese, the 'welfare queen' Blacks, and now the Mexicans (sorry if I missed any groups).
Since its founding America has required an under-class in the form of a despised 'other' to pit the middle-class against, while the upper class consolidates wealth and power and pulls up the economic ladder on the distracted middle.
Still works like a charm, as this discussion demonstrates.
Posted by on May 15, 2007 11:31 AMMy grandparents came here without documentation searching for a better life from a ravaged and poverty stricken European country. They were admitted through Ellis Island and learned English when they got here.
Of course, now that they made it in, the natural temptation would be to join the throngs who want to close the gate on others trying to do the same thing. Why should I have to suffer mild inconvenience so others can enjoy the same quality of life my grandparents ensured I would have?
We all have ancestors who came to America for the same reasons. Now after pillaging the previous local population (Native Americans) we're suddenly very concerned about the rights of people who were here first.
So we tighten the grip on those who want to enter, but you're all kidding yourselves if you think it's for any reason other than good ol' fashioned greed. Tell yourselves what lies you must about the "rule of law," etc, but deep down, you all know it's only because you want to keep "yours" separate from "theirs."
Posted by Grog on May 15, 2007 11:41 AMWell, there are also the Germans (who attempted to start German-language only schools), the Italians, the Russians and other Eastern Europeans--most of us had ancestors who were reviled as immigrants. Of course, for many today, history began the day they were born. And then there are today's talk radio affectionados, whose historical perspective consists of the last thing they heard on the radio.
Posted by anderson on May 15, 2007 11:45 AMICE spokeswoman Pat Reilly says the agency has never heard of any tipster being sued by someone he turned in for hiring illegals. But if you are worried that your identity may become known, call ICE's anonymous toll-free hotline at 866-347-2423.
Report those who hire illegal aliens, but be sure of the facts. Don't report someone just because you suspect they are hiring illegals.
Posted by on May 15, 2007 12:28 PMOMG,
I've read every last word on this thread and I didn't see the righteous and indignant posts by Anderson or Truth...whatsa matter guys, finally decide that the majority is shifting to enforcement of immigration laws?????
Where is your "humanity" posts and your racist accusations???? Guess what? It's like I've said all along, it's not the race, it's not the language, it's not the anti-assimulation to America....IT'S THE LAW BREAKING.
Glad to see you finally got it.
Peace,
Talking to your elected officials is easy.
You can send free faxes to them to voice your opinion and concerns. Go to:
www.numbersusa.com
Also, as in a previous post, www.wehirealiens.com shows some of the businesses that Hire Illegals.
And unless you want more of the same, the only hope for the continuation of the USA is to vote for either Tom Tancredo, or Ron Paul for president in 2008. NO Other candidate will try to work towards the restoration of the rule of law provided for in the United States Constitution, and no ther candidate will try to enforce immigration laws already on the books. Regardless of where they come from or what they look like, immigration to the USA is a simple game of numbers. Too many immigrants, not enough jobs, bad things will happen and continually get worse. Too many horses will denude the pasture. Too many cars cause gridlock. Too many mites kill off the bees. It isn't about greed, or racism or any of that. It is about quality of life, and living responsibly within the law. In reality if the citizens of the USA want to save this nation they would demand a 10 year total moratorium on all immigration. And by the way, the figure that 12-20 million illegal aliens are already here is a figure that is at least 5 years old. The true number is closer to 40 million.
J and his fellow travelers want us all to play stupid and stay stupid. It's the law. Period. Would that we apply such a standard to him or her, then there wouldn't be too many J's walking the streets, cause he and his fellow travelers have probably broken THE LAW. Period. Perhaps many times. But no one is calling him or her a demon. Hmm. I wonder why? So we see that the THE LAW. Period. is good enough for some, but maybe not so good for others. Or, as Orwell might say, some lawbreakers are more equal than others.
Posted by anderson on May 15, 2007 01:17 PMDavid DiBello
While your letter seemed very compassionate to who come here w/o following our current laws in order to better their own lives, how about some compassion for those U.S. citizens who have had their livelihoods stolen by waves of illegals who have taken their jobs by offering to work those jobs (like construction jobs) for less than half of the prevailing wages? I don't hear any mention of them - what we get is the propaganda that the illegals are doing jobs Americans won't do. That's BS.
The American carpenter and/or tradeperson, for example are the victims here. He can't support his family on those artificially low wages even IF he could get hired, or move 10 other nonrelated people into his home in order to survive. It used to be that cities would enforce ordinances about the number of people occupying a home. Now, it is rarely ever done. I've watched homes in my neighborhood turn into rentals and have so many folks coming and going that I can't even figure out who really lives there, among the 8 different vehicles parked there and in front of my home. With that, our property values have decreased. My "sanctuary city" doesn't give a hoot about that. Nor my homeowner's association. Political correctness rules and our complaints fall on deaf ears.
What the open borders people fail to acknowledge is that these illegals have cost many citizens here their livelihoods. Wages are depressed and entire sectors of jobs have disappeared for Americans. Go to a fast food joint these days. What used to be an entry level job for our high school kids is now virtually unavailable, unless you are an illegal and will work really cheap. I shudder to think of whether the health codes are being followed by those establishments - like requiring TB tests of all food handlers.
Mary has the right idea but the issue remains that currently there is no good system in place that can ACCURATELY verify for an employer whether the employee is legal and paperwork in order. Once that status verification system is in place, we need harsh sanctions for those hiring illegals. Hit those corporations hard on the bottom line to bring them into compliance.
I, for one, am willing to pay more in the short term (over the next decade or so) for products until we can get this immigration problem under control - both illegal and legal.
Posted by [Represented No More] RU Serious on May 15, 2007 01:21 PM
Whatever, Anderson......I said I gave up on you but I got lured back in.....I have never called illegals any names except lawbreakers. And I must say, I have a clean driving record, my vehicle is insured, I don't steal, cheat or murder, I don't use illegal drugs (and not many legal ones), I abide by the speed limit and I stop at all stop signs. I even use my blinkers and yeild the right -o-way. Can't think of any laws I've broken...and I certainly don't break laws that I could be punished for but I would expect to be punished if I did. So, I guess any and all of the transgressions you are trying to pin on me just won't stick. I don't expect anything more or less from anyone who willingly lives in MY country.
Posted by -J- on May 15, 2007 01:42 PMAnderson,
You may have done this before, but what is your stance on immigration? I am referring to Amnesty, open or closed borders, immigration laws, etc.
Looking to get a baseline of what the thoughts are on here
Thank you
Posted by bwr on May 15, 2007 01:46 PMOh, bwr, you will be so sorry you opened that can o' wriggley, slimey worms.
I will put Anderson's opinions in a nut shell for you.
We are all ignorant and self-serving for expecting people who immigrate here from ANY country to follow the laws of our country.
It is too late to expect them to conform to the laws of our country, so just accept and support their right ot be human beings seeking a better life.
And if you feel any other way, you are wrong and are a racist.
That about cover it O Holier Than Thou Anderson????
9:58 post,All you got to do is a little research.pelosi said there was no Al Qaeda in Iraq that they were in Pakistan,reid said we should get out of Iraq and go back to fighting Al Qaeda.Again they lie and you are to stupid to know it.
Posted by Keith on May 15, 2007 02:00 PM9:58 post,All you got to do is a little research.pelosi said there was no Al Qaeda in Iraq that they were in Pakistan,reid said we should get out of Iraq and go back to fighting Al Qaeda.Again they lie and you are to stupid to know it.
Posted by Keith on May 15, 2007 02:00 PMKeith,
I don't post much here but I'm glad to see that people like you do. Keep sluging it out.
-J-: "Can't think of any laws I've broken..".
Then you must be a saint...or a liar.
Posted by anderson on May 15, 2007 02:33 PMbwr, you evidently want me to name my stance on immigration law in a rhetorical soundbites rather than in the multitude of issues it entails. Okay (without rhetoric): McCain-Kennedy looks good. There are no open border advocates in Congress. There are probably few closed border advocates (Tancredo being one).
Posted by anderson on May 15, 2007 02:37 PMThank you, Florence, for your excellent letter. Your point is well taken.
Posted by B Stuckey on May 15, 2007 02:49 PMB. Stucky again?
Posted by Shirley ( you can`t be serious) on May 15, 2007 04:45 PMKeith -
"All you got to do is a little research.pelosi said there was no Al Qaeda in Iraq that they were in Pakistan"
It's your claim Keith, it's up to you to back it up - cite a quote and source. Do you know what they call "so and so said ..." - heresay. Besides, if you could cite a quote, I want to see the context and time frame it was made in.
Sorry, I just don't take "Keith wrote" as a source of fact (and for good reason).
Posted by 9:58 post on May 15, 2007 04:46 PMAnderson,
Yes I was wanting your stance on solutions to the immigration issue. Sorry if that offended you. But would it not be more offensive to assume? I guess that is the objective on here. You put forth critique and all I wanted was a point of reference.
I did not ask what politicians you support or not. What is your strategic and tactical ideas? You have an opinion, why not put that in a constructive point of view rather than destructive critiques.
RU serious,
I agree whole heartedly that the main problem and root cause for the wave of illegal immigration is that employers are taking advantage of the situation by paying sub human wages, thus denying decent wages to existing Americans.
I wrote here that in New York during the holiday season Disney offered jobs to people to dress as cartoon characters, and it paid $10 an hour WITH healthcare benefits. The response was overwhelming as there were lines of applicants circling a full city block in Times Square.
Americans aren't doing the job because the job is "youcky," they aren't doing it because the pay isn't sustaining, and I have to take deep breathes when I hear politicians advocate this as "the cause" because, as you have said, it is pure BS, and insult to one's intelligence.
Employers should be punished severely for this extortion - pay $3 an hour or I'll tell the government. But of course I'm sure there is a silent "lobbying group" on their behalf. The first punishment I would give is a $50,000 fine, second a $100,000 fine, third have the government put their company into a trustee ship and remove their management.
That is why, as I previously wrote, to deal with the problem we have today, when it is "already 11 million people too late," is to get these people documented, give them their SS# which will force employers to then pay legal wages. Good for illegal aliens, and good for competition. The only drawback is the consumer paying more for goods and services, but this is just correcting an injustice, becasue consumers aren't paying the fair price for day care, nannies, migrant workers and day laborers.
It is also good for National security to know who is in this country.
I also advocate building a moat with fences on both sides, so this problem doesn't happen again. But this might not be necessary if employers follow the law, because if you can't get a job without documentation, there would be no reason to come to this country.
Posted by David diBello on May 16, 2007 08:07 AMbwr,
At the risk of offending all those who prefer it otherwise, I will offer a few fundamental ideas concerning "strategic and tactical" ways in which to approach the problem.
1. Begin by considering the first necessity in any program. That is, the COST.
a. Figure out, and present to the public, a cost estimate for mobilizing the force necessary to go out and round up - or arrest, if you prefer - the several million illegals in the couuntry.
b. Present a cost estimate for housing and feeding these people after you have rounded them up.
c. Present a cost estimate for the transportation necessary to put these people back across the border to Mexico, or send them back to other countries in those cases where they are not of Mexican origin.
d. Offer these cost estimates to the public as part of argument for rounding up and deporting all illegals.
2. Consider the fact that there are alternative plans, or ideas, by whatever name or designation; and when refuting them, do so on the basis of realistic cost comparrisons, not just on the wholesale basis of not liking their current title.
3. If your plan be for building a wall along our borders, once again begin with a basic cost estimate for the project; and once again, use realistic cost comparisons, not just rhetoric about "open borders", "closed borders", as if these were achievable without any real expenses.
4. Assuming that your presentation of cost estimates is completed, go on to show what forces - particularly manpower - your plan would use, Federal, State, Local, or whatever; and be able to indicate what might be the consequences to the locale were that manpower to be put to use for your purpose, rather than allowed to do their own jobs locally - law enforcement, or troops, as the case might be.
5. Present a clear and concise argument as to how you are going to protect the RIGHTS of those who are here legally, when you engage in the action.
6. Present a clear and concise argument concerning the benefits, if any, and/or the damages, if any, that your plan will do to the businesses, who may be affected by the action, and to the economy of the area, as well as that of the whole country.
7. Present a clear and concise argument concerning the way in which families are to be either benefited or damaged, as well as the way in which the community as a whole will be affected by implementation of the plan.
8. Explain, clearly and concisely, why your plan is better than an alternate plan that might allow for work residence, and even eventual citizenship in time. And demonstrate, with relevant examples, the superiority of your plan over previous alternate plans and actions.
And finally, at least for now, explain - again clearly and concisely - what your own basic strategy and tactical operations are to be, were your plan to be finally implemented.
In other words, is your plan just "shoot them at the border", and/or "round them up and throw them back across if they're here"? Or do you also have a sound basis in strategic and tactical ideas to propound?
Posted by Old Grouch on May 16, 2007 08:39 AM[ ]
Posted by Keith on May 16, 2007 09:16 AM[ ]
Posted by Keith on May 16, 2007 09:16 AMDear Old Grouch,
I am in favor of financial prudence but remember it has to be done without compromising our principles.
Perfect example is in NY where we have a large homeless problem, and housing shortages. One can also look at the welfare problem and ask the remedy to fix it.
Currently we throw some bucks at homeless by offering food stamps, shelters, etc. Housing seems like a chore cause no developer wants to build something with fixed rents, they rather mareket place compensation, and we throw bucks at welfare receipients, but not the total help they need to become self sustaining (Mayor Bloomberg is making some efforts to remedy this now).
We usually do enough for people to survive, not cost as much, and while not solving the problem, appeasing it. This would be considered cost efficient.
I say it is penny wise, dollar foolish. Get the housing, and education and job training for these people so they can once and for all get off of welfare, and not have offspring indictrinated into this life style.
So when we use cost as our compass, we must remember not to compromise our values or principles, or cut our nose to spite our face.
As for a fence on the border, if we punished employers for hiring illegals to the point they won't do it again, then the would stop the flow of illegals (going forward) from coming here (sans a job in advance) because there would be no jobs.
Of course think of all those "new votes" being lost if this is done. This is why a conservative Republican President wishess to embrace the Hispanic / Mexican illegal aliens.
Posted by David DiBello on May 16, 2007 10:15 AMGoodness gracious, Old Grouch, you sure do complicate matters. I thought "It's the law. Period." was everything we needed to know about immigrants and immigration policy. I mean, that's the essence of the letter published above and pretty much everyone agreed. Now you're asking that we actually apply some thought to the issue.
And thank you for responding to bwr, whose question to me I took as not being made in good faith.
Posted by anderson on May 16, 2007 10:17 AMMr. DiBello, it's perfectly legitimate to raise the issue of costs. Those who favor restricting immigration raise it all the time. So it's only fair that the costs of enforcment be considered as well. Besides, Old Grouch didn't draw any conclusions about what we should do, or ask that any principles be compromised. He only pointed out that the costs of enforcement are part of the equation and need to be considered along with other factors.
Posted by anderson on May 16, 2007 10:35 AMThanks Old Grouch.
Appreciate your feedback and agree with the cost aspect you have put forth. I would also add the costs to taxpayers on the other side.
What are the costs of doing nothing?
What are the costs of Amnesty?
In both there are far too many to list and if I forgot 1 may get in trouble.
By taking all of the good costing points you have brought forward, a truer cost can be achieved. I have a problem with both as I dont trust the govt to count the right change back at a candy store.
If I get done with my meetings early enough I will hopefully provide more feedback, but work is beckoning.
Thanks again OG
Anderson what are you running for public office? As you say my question is not in good faith, well fine. You keep up the obtuse answers and destructive comments just like a politician. Of all of the nasty comments from both sides on here, think using politician is the worst.
bwr, If you are really interested in my opinion ,or arguments on immigration, I will know it by your questions. The only thing I've seen you mention had the flavor of insincerity (e.g.. "open borders"). In the meantime, I guess I will just remain "obtuse". Oh, I will tell you this: I agree with Old Grouch's questions for approaching the issue. There you are. How's that for being non-"destructive".
Posted by anderson on May 16, 2007 11:50 AMAnderson was really interested in your opinion. You have posted a lot on these threads and was trying to get a baseline of the subject.
I truly feel that to understand all sides a discussion is needed for me.
Oh well. You are too smart for all of us. You dont need dialogue. Enjoy your day
Keith:
"[ ]"
Your sure seem to get a lot of those, don't you Keith?
Posted by CL on May 16, 2007 12:19 PMDavid,
Perhaps the point might be well made that ALL programs designed to be the sweeping answer to"solving the problem(s)" might best begin with effective cost analysis, and cost estimate presentations.
The surest way to bog down anything in the way of a major governmental program into confusion worse confounded is to propose it as being something in which it is necessary to - somehow, some way, any way at all - have to deal with "our principles", before we lay out a practical approach based on the economic factors. Unfortunately, that's the major problem here. The diversity of "principles" has become so entrenched, and so vociferously expanded upon every time the topic arises, that - outside the very special, and limited, area of a forum such as this - nothing practical ever gets mentioned, much less discussed.
And even here, the request for "strategy and tactics" is a notable exception to the general tenure of the postings on the topic. Would that it were otherwise. But, that is also what feeds the "political" aspect, as well as giving rise to the idea that this or that politician - or political party - has all the answers that no one seeks elsewhere.
One of the things for which we all owe a vote of thanks to the RMN is its offering of a potential marketplace of ideas, here on this forum; rather than nothing more than most "blogs" appear to be today, some kind of adolescent mutual mental masturbation and admiration society.
Sometimes, usns out hyar in Injun Fightin Country manage to get sumpin right after all!
Posted by Old Grouch on May 16, 2007 12:39 PMKeith:
"[ ]"
I hope this isn't a true reflection of Keith's thoughts.
Old Grouch. I do not trust nor believe in the words of either party. We hold them up and what do they do. They create the hatred we see on here. You and I may disagree at times but hell, at least we talk. Hell of a lot better than some of the other junk on here
Posted by bwr on May 16, 2007 01:00 PMOld Grouch,
I see. You're describing Congress, debate, debate, debate, and then nothing gets done, or it gets done in opposition to public will, but coinciding with lobbying pressure.
They should have game show rules whereby you select a topic, but have to give Mr. Trebek the answer, otherwise like that drowning person, if you choose to do nothing instead of throwing him a life perserver - he'll drown.
If you look at healthcare, immigration, prescription drugs, pension costs, outsourcing, tution costs, etc. regardless of where you stand (in a democracy - mob rules) Congress has allowed us to drown.
I stand corrected - they did pass a tighter bankruptcy filing clause for indiuviduals, but never passed a law to restrict the interest institutions charge.
Oh and yeah, they passed a prescription drug plan to burst our budget, but what does Bush care as long as people don't shop overseas, but at extortionary US drug comapnies, and his friends maintain the profit.
That from an administration that endorses laissez faire (let the Marketplace rule).
Posted by David DiBello on May 16, 2007 03:10 PMLooks like the Senate is about ready to announce their amnesty bill. It appears that Kennedy has been able to wring a number of concessions out of the Republicans.
The critical part of the bill is the "Z" Visas which would allow illegal immigrants to bring their parents, spouses and children to the U.S.
Sources say there are 3 categories of "Z" Visas:
Z-1 -- Illegal alien present and working in the United States up to January 1, 2007
Z-2 -- Parents and spouses of illegal aliens qualifying under the Z-1 category
Z-3 -- Children of illegal aliens qualifying under the Z-1 category
One section of the proposal grants these “Z” non-immigrants four-year visas for an indefinite period of time. These visas would be given to people not currently in the United States if they are related to a current illegal worker.
Even if they chose not to pursue the so called “pathway to citizenship,” under certain conditions, these "Z" Visa holders would be able to legally remain in the U.S. for an indefinite period of time.
Watch the news over the next week. This is what will be coming out.
It is amnesty under any definition I can think of.
HOW STUPID do they think we are, anyway?
These Senators expect us to believe that an incompetent government which couldn't/wouldn't enforce our laws before will now miraculously become responsible? They think that THIS mess is what we want?
Harry Reid has postponed the cloture vote. Call your Senator if you care about this.
Posted by RU Serious on May 16, 2007 05:37 PMDavid,
I certainly can't disagree with your portrait of Congress - or as it equally applies to almost any Legislative body anywhere.
On the other hand, what alternative is there?
There may be an attempt at some kind of situation that would involve a form of "pathway to citizenship". Vide the posting by RUSerious.
It is a proposal. It is something positive, whether or not it even comes close to being perfect. So what is the response?
A diatribe against "Amnesty". And . . . ?
What next? We already have a vigilante form of "border patrol".
Do we just degenerate into a form of mob action? Or what?
Posted by Old Grouch on May 16, 2007 09:59 PMSenate leaders and the President have come to an agreement on a reform bill. Not ideal, but something that's resulted from negotiation and compromise.
Tancredo and his fellow travellers in the House will of course try to derail it at every point. Guaranteed. Yet that will not stop him from proclaiming himself a "leader" on immigration.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070517/ap_on_go_co/immigration_congress
Posted by anderson on May 17, 2007 12:31 PMFlorance..good letter.
-J- and you don't steal Americans Identity.