July 29, 2010
— Ace There is some question over whether this would require a Constitutional amendment, or whether it's a matter of interpretation such that legislation could change it. Conservatives often argue the latter, but I sort of think the Constitution says what it seems to say and so it would require a full amendment.
“I may introduce a constitutional amendment that changes the rules if you have a child here,” Graham said during an interview with Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren. “Birthright citizenship I think is a mistake ... We should change our Constitution and say if you come here illegally and you have a child, that child's automatically not a citizen.”...
“People come here to have babies,” he said. “They come here to drop a child. It's called "drop and leave." To have a child in America, they cross the border, they go to the emergency room, have a child, and that child's automatically an American citizen. That shouldn't be the case. That attracts people here for all the wrong reasons.”
..
“I'm a practical guy, but when you go forward, I don't want 20 million more 20 years from now,” he said. “I want to be fair. I want to be humane. We need immigration policy, but it should be on our terms, not someone else's. I don't know how to fix it all. But I do know what makes people mad, that 12 million people came here, and there seems to be no system to deal with stopping 20 million 20 years from now.”
Graham, I'm guessing, sees this as a piece of a larger deal, a deal to get him the large-scale amnesty he wants.
But it's significant that he's thinking about conceding such a large piece to that end.
If there were serious enforcement (demonstrated over five years) plus this amendment, I could see myself persuaded to support some kind of large (but not blanket) amnesty for, say, half of the illegals here, those with the longest stays and strongest ties to the country, and say a five year special visa for the rest. But five years and that's that.
Posted by: Ace at
09:22 AM
| Comments (248)
Post contains 381 words, total size 2 kb.
O/T (on topic): Fuck Lindsey Graham. Big difference between "might," "will" and "is doing."
Posted by: MrScribbler at July 29, 2010 09:25 AM (Ulu3i)
The last amnesty carried promises of enforcement, and those promises are worse than broken... they will sue your ass to keep them broken.
We simply cannot trust the electioneering beltway on any new deals, which creates a huge problem. I guess I can live with a 5 year proof our side will be honored, but that won't happen and we all know it. And they would probably stop enforcement the second they got their side of the deal.
We've been lied to in a most disgusting way.
Posted by: Legendary Film Star Rick Moranis at July 29, 2010 09:26 AM (dUOK+)
You know how you deport 20 million illegals?
One at a time.
No on amnesty. Go out the way you came and come back through proper channels.
Posted by: garrett at July 29, 2010 09:27 AM (nj4KU)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 29, 2010 09:27 AM (9Cooa)
I do know what makes people mad, that 12 million people came here, and there seems to be no system to deal with stopping 20 million 20 two years from now.
FIFY
Posted by: Atomic Roach at July 29, 2010 09:28 AM (rMMMP)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 29, 2010 09:29 AM (9Cooa)
Exactly. Do what you are supposed to do first then we'll talk. These things are not part of a deal they are what is required to even start considering a deal.
Posted by: Rocks at July 29, 2010 09:29 AM (Q1lie)
“I may introduce a constitutional amendment that changes the rules if you have a child here,” Graham said during an interview with Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren. “Birthright citizenship I think is a mistake ... We should change our Constitution and say if you come here illegally and you have a child, that child's automatically not a citizen.”
Well, shut my mouth and call me delusional. I thought, for just a second, Graham the Sham said something I agree with.
Time for some electro-shock therapy on me nut sack....
Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 09:29 AM (OlN4e)
For what? There's literally no job that requires a Mexican semi-indentured peon to do it.
If you want an earning ceiling for already-fucked Americans, pass a maximum-wage law for everyone without a college diploma. Don't screw around.
Posted by: oblig. at July 29, 2010 09:30 AM (x7Ao8)
"We should change our Constitution and say if you come here illegally and you have a child, that child's automatically not a citizen.”
How the hell do we do this if it's illegal to ask the illegal to show their papers??
Posted by: Arizona, scratching head at July 29, 2010 09:30 AM (pLTLS)
Posted by: ParisParamus at July 29, 2010 09:31 AM (7Pu9b)
Concur with your plan, giving citizenship to the most deserving. Bar those convicted of felonies (or multiple misdemeanors), those who have relied on public assistance for more than a brief period of time (or at all), known gang members, and people with civil iiues like unpaid judgments, conducting business without a license, multiple traffic infractions and speeding tickets, etc., etc.
And they don't jump in line ahead of those pursuing citizenship the right way.
Posted by: buzz at July 29, 2010 09:31 AM (kwhut)
How the hell do we do this if it's illegal to ask the illegal to show their papers??
We're gonna rely on their sacred honor to come forward and 'fess up.
Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 09:32 AM (OlN4e)
If there were serious enforcement (demonstrated over five years) plus this amendment, I could see myself persuaded to support some kind of large (but not blanket) amnesty for, say, half of the illegals here, those with the longest stays and strongest ties to the country, and say a five year special visa for the rest. But five years and that's that
yeah i am fine with that. I would also say that any illegal alien here who has committed a crime, felony or misdemenor(with the exception of being here illegally of course), is excluded from Amensty or a Visa.
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:32 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 29, 2010 09:32 AM (UOM48)
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:35 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 09:35 AM (RkRxq)
Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 09:36 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 29, 2010 09:36 AM (UOM48)
The United States of America has laws intended to protect our borders.
Enforce them.
If we took that simple, logical step, far fewer children-of-illegals would be born here.
Yes, the amendment that confers this abused right should be repealed. Should have been done decades ago. But if we closed the fucking borders to anyone who isn't eligible to cross them, that would at least be a start.
Graham should go back to whatever rock he crawled out of and STFU. I hate every iota of that cracka.
Posted by: MrScribbler at July 29, 2010 09:36 AM (Ulu3i)
Posted by: Dark Helmet at July 29, 2010 09:37 AM (QKKT0)
Nearly 5k Americans killed each day by illegals.
What's the rush.
that can't be true, that would be 1.825 million people
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:39 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: joncelli at July 29, 2010 09:39 AM (RD7QR)
And if he doesn't, why should he get that break when someone who came in the front door and played by the rules has paid that much in?
Posted by: cthulhu at July 29, 2010 09:40 AM (/0IOT)
Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 09:41 AM (KUUXH)
Actualy, there is a much simpler way to do this, and it can be done by law.
Reintroduce the idea that there are NO DUAL CITIZENS when it comes to US Citizenship. If you are US, you are nothing else.
Then DEPORT all those parents... when they take their US Citizen kid with them, they'll have all kinds of problems in their home countries... and if the kid takes citizenship in that other country to go to school and such? They give up their US citizenship.
Posted by: Romeo13 at July 29, 2010 09:41 AM (H+oXM)
So you've got someone who has been here for, say, 10 years -- making about $20K under the table, sending what he could back to Michoacan....how is this person going to make up his $30,000 under-contribution to Social Security?
And if he doesn't, why should he get that break when someone who came in the front door and played by the rules has paid that much in?
Simple. Because the government ISNT going to enforce the law, ever. They just aren't. Those people ARE going to become citizens, it is just a matter of time. So we should probably start trying to focus on the best possible deal we can get. Ending anchor babies and border enforcement would probably be all we are going to get.
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:42 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 09:42 AM (KUUXH)
Posted by: Cicero at July 29, 2010 09:42 AM (QKKT0)
>>>The problem, Ace, is that we all know Graham will support Amnesty with the promise of these programs to be implemented at a later date, after the amnesty.
True, true... But we can insist on the order of things.
Obama will gladly pay Lindsay tomorrow for a cheeseburger today.
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:42 AM (wuv1c)
Make a new rule that the doc must call ICE if they suspect someones illegal. If we deport the parents the minute the kid is born this crap will stop.
Posted by: Buzzsaw at July 29, 2010 09:43 AM (tf9Ne)
Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 09:43 AM (KUUXH)
Ok, but how do we know he's really serious about this if we don't have video of him choking a coyote on the Arizona border?
Rotflmao.. jesus, just how stupid does Lindsey think we are, anyway?
Posted by: StuckOnStupid at July 29, 2010 09:44 AM (e8T35)
Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 01:41 PM (KUUXH)
What will work IMO is to actualy enforce current law. Check EVERYONEs status if they have interaction with the cops... check EVERYONE applying for a job... give the SSN bogus numbers being used to ICE...
I think they'd self deport over time.
Posted by: Romeo13 at July 29, 2010 09:44 AM (H+oXM)
Posted by: joncelli at July 29, 2010 09:44 AM (RD7QR)
Likewise, I may one day get a life - doesn't mean I will. Grahamnstry is shaking this carrot stick for his amnesty deal. Probably won't be enforced and/or the courts will strike it down on humanitarian grounds. It's a fucking trap. Besides, even if he did introduce this Constitutional Amendment, what are the odds it will be passed by 2/3rds of Congress and the States?
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 29, 2010 09:45 AM (9hSKh)
Posted by: Stan at July 29, 2010 09:45 AM (9rQOT)
Ahahaha! Good one, Lindsey. Now make sure you end your set with "and don't forget to try the veal," and you'll be golden.
BTW, who knew Graham was such a bigot?
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at July 29, 2010 09:45 AM (swuwV)
Posted by: Linsdey Graham at July 29, 2010 09:45 AM (e8YaH)
I would be even a little harsher. (Or at least start bargaining there)
For your upper half over the age of 18, with no brushes with the law beyond an infraction. Permanent resident with no chance of Citizenship. Less than 18, Citizenship upon graduation from High School.
Felons, immediate deportation.
All the rest, 2 years, plenty of time to plan.
Those who knowingly disrespected our laws, and our sovereignty, should not be part of making those laws, nor part of that sovereignty. If they think that is too harsh, they can affirm their respect for our laws by returning to their country and immigrating legally, in which case their time gainfully employed in the US would be to their benefit, and their status while here would not be held against them.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at July 29, 2010 09:46 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Not at the table Carlos at July 29, 2010 09:46 AM (xO+6C)
Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 09:46 AM (KUUXH)
Something that will never happen, but would help solve the problem is enforcement of penalties against business. Why can't we have prohibitive fines against businesses that hire illegals.
I have to check documents for I-9s whenever we hire people. We are federally required to do so.
If you put a massive fine on each illegal hired, companies would stop hiring them. No jobs = no reason to stay in america.
I think we often let big, and small, business off the hook in this illegal immigration issue.
The most powerful groups are aligned for illegal aliens. The Catholic and Evangelical Churches, Unions, Leftists, Big and Small Businesses, and Foreign governments.
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:46 AM (wuv1c)
For Graham, at least, this is complete BS because it will never NEVER happen; it's a smoke screen to hide his real positions.
It also gives the MFM a huge target for their "Republicans are racists" claim.
Posted by: Ed Anger at July 29, 2010 09:47 AM (7+pP9)
He can squeak on about a constitutional amendment because he knows it would have zero chance of approval. Come 2/3 of both houses and the States? Does he think we are damn stupid?
As for whether of not it is needed I don't think so. The current anchor baby stuff is based on a bad interpretation by the immigration people of the Wong Kim Ark case. In that case the court ruled on the children of LEGAL immigrants born in this country. That fits the portion of the 14th amendment referring to "subject to the jurisdiction thereof". The only "jurisdiction" that illegal migrants have is the ability to be deported.
The fact is that the court has NEVER ruled directly on the anchor baby scheme. Perhaps congress can pass a law and get a ruling.
Posted by: Vic at July 29, 2010 09:47 AM (/jbAw)
Presuming someone actually does their job of enforcement, the resulting improvement is only addressing the result. The root cause here is Mexico's inability or unwillingness to work to improve the living standards of it's citizens. Continued failure will result in the problem either remaining or worsening
In light of that, border control and strict enforcement can help to alleviate the problem, best that we can hope for, for now. Sure as shit amnesty aint the way to go..
Posted by: irongrampa at July 29, 2010 09:47 AM (ud5dN)
Posted by: nevergiveup at July 29, 2010 09:47 AM (0GFWk)
What this means is that the US will always have to deal with large numbers of illegals here. There is no stopping that. That means that the only action that is of any real value is INTERIOR ENFORCEMENT. If we are not willing to do it, now, then we will never do it and it will be one shamnesty after another until this nation is dead. But, Grahamnesty and all the idiots are telling us how we just can't possibly do interior enforcement, now. That is unacceptable.
Grahamnesty is an idiot and a traitor. He should be deported to Mexico, himself ... in a dress.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 29, 2010 09:48 AM (Qp4DT)
Posted by: joncelli at July 29, 2010 01:44 PM (RD7QR)
Goat + leaf blower = comedy gold big trouble
Posted by: Cicero at July 29, 2010 09:48 AM (QKKT0)
Posted by: RM at July 29, 2010 09:48 AM (GkYyh)
Posted by: Linsdey Graham at July 29, 2010 09:49 AM (e8YaH)
Never. This is a recipe for national death. Period.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 29, 2010 09:49 AM (Qp4DT)
Now, if Miss Lindsey were pushing to sayyyyyy... abort the offspring... I'm sure the we would jump on the chance. In the name of population control and all.
Do it for the children planet!
Posted by: John Holdren at July 29, 2010 09:49 AM (mtAxB)
Posted by: Vic at July 29, 2010 09:49 AM (/jbAw)
"how do we know he's really serious about this if we don't have video of him choking a coyote on the Arizona border?"
And he's gotta be choking the coyote with a Sidewinder. A live one.
Posted by: Joanie (Oven Gloves) at July 29, 2010 09:50 AM (HaYO4)
Just repeating "They all must go home!" isn't going to carry that 51%. Every time the question is put to them in those terms they recoil.
Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 01:41 PM (KUUXH)
That depends, Ace. 5 years ago here in Arkansas I never saw a Mexican, now we're ass deep in them. I don't mean Hispanic Americans, I mean non-English speaking wet backs. We just got a petition signed (77,000+ signatures required) to put a constitutional amendment on next Septembers ballot that forces anyone who wants any kind of government benefits to prove citizenship. Applies to everyone except in cases of emergency and those under 14 yoa. People here are fed up.
Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 09:50 AM (OlN4e)
Simple. Because the government ISNT going to enforce the law, ever. They just aren't. Those people ARE going to become citizens, it is just a matter of time. So we should probably start trying to focus on the best possible deal we can get. Ending anchor babies and border enforcement would probably be all we are going to get.
Ending anchor babies is a moot point anyway, if everytime we turn around were waving a magic wand and granting illegals citizenship in huge waves. It's also a moot point if we don't enforce our own laws to deal with those that are here illegally. What difference does it make if you are an illegal alien if there are no consequences for it to begin with?
As far as border enforcement, that's bullshit of the highest order I'm afraid. We've been promised border enforcement for decades now, and they've barely lifted a finger. Sure, they might pass something that says they'll start protecting the border, but we all know it's going to be crap. Much like this "paygo" bullshit, they'll just ignore it after they pass it.
Posted by: StuckOnStupid at July 29, 2010 09:50 AM (e8T35)
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:50 AM (wuv1c)
2012. Which is the current leading year for the end of the world, go figure.
/In the end, there will be only chaos.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 29, 2010 09:50 AM (9hSKh)
No one who broke the law to come here or to stay here should be tolerated.
Another amnesty is just going to start the flood again, as they gamble on another one after that.
Posted by: Rob Crawford at July 29, 2010 09:51 AM (ZJ/un)
And he's gotta be choking the coyote with a Sidewinder. A live one.
Call me Lindsey, one more time.. I dare you..
rotflmao
Posted by: StuckOnStupid at July 29, 2010 09:51 AM (e8T35)
Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 09:51 AM (KUUXH)
Posted by: David Icke at July 29, 2010 09:52 AM (IkEhE)
Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 09:53 AM (KUUXH)
( snip )
Nearly 5k Americans killed each day by illegals.
( snip )
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber
Screw off, Bigot. Could you, like, not pretend to be on our side?
( BTW, 5000 x 365 = 1.825 Million. Get some outside help before typing the numbers on your keyboard )
Posted by: Kristopher at July 29, 2010 09:53 AM (kCEOg)
I know there are hospitals in border states where that would pretty much empty the wards.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at July 29, 2010 09:53 AM (swuwV)
Any importation of the poorest, sickest and dumbest rimmigrants from the socialist third world will result in a permanent demographic swing toward socialism. Any amnesty will mean that we will never be on the winning side of an election again in our lifetimes. Or more likely, there will be no candidates we can support running for elections in our lifetimes.
Amnesty is the very last thing America will do.
Posted by: Truman North at July 29, 2010 09:53 AM (e8YaH)
Otherwise this nation and culture and economy cease to exist as we've known them ( as we've known America ) and this country becomes nothing more than a mall
Posted by: SantaRosaStan, born in the USA at July 29, 2010 09:54 AM (JrRME)
Posted by: Barack Obama at July 29, 2010 09:54 AM (VmtE9)
2012. Which is the current leading year for the end of the world, go figure.
Actually 2014 unless we have a benign act of God.
Posted by: Vic at July 29, 2010 09:54 AM (/jbAw)
Posted by: Not at the table Carlos at July 29, 2010 09:54 AM (xO+6C)
Depends on which libertarians you talk to. Some see immigration policy as arbitrary restrictions on freedom of movement, others see it as a necessary ingredient of the rule of law. Ideally, we wouldn't need the restrictions, but you understand why we do.
I see your position as more libertarian than the strict conservative position, which is rarely explicit other than "border security." Obviously we will need some kind of comprehensive reform (after demonstrated security) that tends to be a little more generous to immigrants than the status quo, or we'll be back where we started in 20 years.
Posted by: Stan at July 29, 2010 09:55 AM (9rQOT)
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:55 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: LiveFreeOrDie at July 29, 2010 09:55 AM (sYHKJ)
BTW,
Enjoying the commentary that so far has not included calling Ace a squish or turncoat for having put something on the table for discussion.
Posted by: RM at July 29, 2010 09:55 AM (GkYyh)
Everyone old enough to remember the attempt to pass the Equal Rights Amendment knows this is a joke.
Posted by: Ed Anger at July 29, 2010 09:56 AM (7+pP9)
In the meantime...
licenses for illegals
voting rights for illegals
free tuition for illegals
free health care for illegals
free housing for illegals
MAYBE we should put an end to this nonsense first and then you can jerk us off with fantasies about amending the Constitution.
Posted by: Alpha & Omega Man at July 29, 2010 09:56 AM (uFokq)
Posted by: Waylon at July 29, 2010 09:56 AM (0Md1Q)
Posted by: nevergiveup at July 29, 2010 09:57 AM (0GFWk)
As much as I'd like to see mass deportation, or a credible threat for this to happen, I agree that it is impractical, if not impossible.
I truly believe that 70-80% of the problems associated with illegal immigration can be fixed (ameliorated, actually) with a serious re-vamping of the taxation system in the US.
A flat tax on consumption, food included, will force those who do not put into the system now, do so. The huge swaths of immigrants simply take out of the system and do not put anything in. Is this not the main reason that states and municipalities are so underfunded?
This should also serve to lower the burden on people like us who disproportionately shoulder the responsibility of keeping America afloat.
If the cost of being here is too high for them as a result of this, they will self-deport.
This would be a huge step in the right direction and also have the benefit of them assimilation more. They are no longer in the shadows, keeping to themselves.
As for the criminallly inclined, throw -em out just like any other deportation subject.
Posted by: Gunslinger at July 29, 2010 09:57 AM (Zi+FQ)
Posted by: ChicagoJedi at July 29, 2010 09:57 AM (WZFkG)
Yes we need immigration reform, but NOT what has been rolled out the last half dozen times. Every bill that has come out since the first major rewrite in 1965 has basically been amnesty and open invitation for illegals to flood across the border.
We are no longer the country of the 19th century with vast open areas in the West. Our cities are overcrowded shit holes run by corrupt communist hacks AND there is no longer a vast area open for the inhabitants to flee to and take up farming.
This is not to mention that we have entire towns in CA with a population > 20,000 in which none of the citizens speak English. The current crew of "immigrants" do not appear to desire to assimilate and the current crowd of liberals do not think they should. The schools have gone from teaching America as a mixing pot to America as a salad bowl where "diversity" is celebrated and heritage counts for all, unless you have a European heritage then you are a racist.
Yes, there are a lot of things that need to be done to "fix" our immigration laws. The first one of these should be to repeal that POS of Amnesty Round I that got us where we are today.
We need immigration law that does the following AND that is enforced:
1. Eliminate the BS anchor baby interpretation by providing a definition of what the term “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” means, which is not dashing across the border to deliver a baby. Personally, I would require that at least one of the parents of any child born in the U.S. be a citizen before that child was eligible for “birthright” citizenship. If not, then the child would have to undergo naturalization.
2. Provide a reliable means for employers to check the status of employees.
3. Provide severe punishments for knowingly hiring illegals (or reckless disregard). That punishment should include jail time for repeat violations.
4. Eliminate ALL benefits for illegals including schools for children.
5. Rewrite legal immigration to allow in immigrants with a desirable education and/or skill set and arrange the waiting list to have the most skilled/educated at the top of the list. (Australian system) Also include a check for communicable diseases (as we did in the past) and provide for immunization. Immigrants from countries on the list of terror support need not apply.
6. For groups that already have large populations in the U.S. who have not assimilated, reduce the allowable numbers until they do (eliminate whole towns that do not speak English)
7. Provide severe penalties for mules.
8. Provide the death penalty for people involved in sex slavery.
9. Eliminate all forms of asylum. That system has been abused to the point of making it a joke. Any true case that needs to be let in should be a case by case special act passed by congress. Get them on record.
10. Immigrants who become involved in any serious crime prior to becoming a citizen should be deported back to their home country.
11. Absolutely no dual citizenship allowed.
Posted by: Vic at July 29, 2010 09:57 AM (/jbAw)
Posted by: JackStraw at July 29, 2010 09:58 AM (VW9/y)
is pretty clear. The issue is really the "anchor baby" problem - that is strictly statutory. Eliminate family reunification (my preference) or modify so that only parents with legal status at the time of birth are eligible. The child could be left with a guardian in the US or taken home to reenter when an adult. There will be howling about the cruelty and inhumanity of forcing people to make unpleasant decisions.
Posted by: deadman at July 29, 2010 09:58 AM (dvEtf)
Yeah, a lot of us are not in favor of "comprehensive" immigration reform just because we know it's a scam. If the borders are secure (i.e., no massive influx after the law's passed) and there's an ongoing commitment to enforcement, then we can talk about comprehensive reform. I still prefer the idea of bringing people in who intend to be citizens rather than guest worker programs that have failed in Europe, but the ruling class needs to play straight with us.
Posted by: AmishDude at July 29, 2010 09:58 AM (T0NGe)
Meanwhile...
the Labor Secretary, Linda douche bag Solis, is making sure illegals earn their fair wages.
I don't remember ANY Republicans, let alone Graham, saying anything about that.
Posted by: Alpha & Omega Man at July 29, 2010 09:58 AM (uFokq)
Visas expire, you know. If we adopted a system half as effective as, say, Japan's -- when I was there, they stapled a little slip to your passport that had to be turned in the day you left. I'm told they do follow up on people who don't do as ordered. They also were most insistent on knowing where you were going to be staying, and for how long -- people who overstay their welcome would be booted out.
As they should be.
A foreign friend who has been here legally for years is facing seventeen kinds of grief from ICE while renewing her work permit. She has violated no laws and has done everything one could reasonably expect from from a legal resident, but the immigration nazis are making her life hell.
When I was growing up in California, I remember annual radio messages telling every alien to report and register or face penalties and be liable to arrest. A good system, one we should return to. Immediately.
Posted by: MrScribbler at July 29, 2010 09:59 AM (Ulu3i)
I tend to agree with the self-deportation argument--do you recall the stories of illegals packing and moving when SB1070 was on the horizon? I'd wager if enforcement only was implemented, the illegal population would dwindle greatly.
Posted by: irongrampa at July 29, 2010 09:59 AM (ud5dN)
Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 10:00 AM (KUUXH)
He wishes! I suggest you rescind your offense, Sir!
Posted by: Reptile at July 29, 2010 10:00 AM (swuwV)
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 10:00 AM (RkRxq)
Remember when Obama said he's committed to nuclear energy and building more nuclear power plants?
This is the same jerkoff maneuver.
These cocksuckers in Washington think we're fucking stupid.
Posted by: Alpha & Omega Man at July 29, 2010 10:00 AM (uFokq)
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber
"mongrel
2. taboo a person of mixed race "
I happen to be a mongrel asshole.
You can take that shit and go sell it at stormfront.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at July 29, 2010 10:00 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Ed Anger at July 29, 2010 01:57 PM (7+pP9)
Someone saw him eat a piece of brie once. It was only on a dare and he immediately washed it down with Valu-Rite but people have long memories.
Posted by: Rocks at July 29, 2010 10:00 AM (Q1lie)
Not to mention the slap in the face to those that followed the procedure to come here. Gotta really make THEM feel top notch.
Posted by: irongrampa at July 29, 2010 10:01 AM (ud5dN)
Posted by: Lincolntf at July 29, 2010 10:02 AM (+O8yf)
I think we on the right need to resign ourselves on some of these issues.
If it isn't clear to you that the government, repbublican, democrat, green, libertarian. etc won't enforce border law at this point then you are dense.
In an ideal world, our government would enforce the laws on the books. I think we all agree on that.
But it will never happen. The most powerful interests on the right the religious, big and small businesses, etc and the most powers interests on the left, the unions, academics, etc. all support non enforecement or amnesty.
We can't beat those groups. We simply can't.. The best we can do is try to prevent future immigration problems.
The best we can hope for, i think, is deportation of the crimnal elements, sealing up the boarder, ending anchor babies, offering citizenship to those who have been living here for 7 or so years, and visas to those who wish to remain here. Then increasing our H1-B(i think) visas, which are for skilled and educated immigrants.
America needs immigrants, that is part of our strength. In 50 years when Europe is old and dying and China has 25% more men that women, we will be a strong a vibrant nation with a middle aged to young population.
I know comprimise sucks, especially on principles you hold dearly, but we will never get 100 percent of what we want on this issue.
Just look at the history of immigration in this country, the amnesty always wins out, we just need to do what we can to prevent the next one.
in my humble opinion
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 10:02 AM (wuv1c)
Do your own fucking landscaping ( or zero-scape it
Clean your own fucking house
Don't go out to dinner as often ( pick places which use kids, not illegals )
Avoid large hotels / motels ( see above )
Or, just sit back and let this nation be overrun by non-citizens who will turn it into a combination of Juarez, Kowloon, Mumbai, San Salvador, and Manilla
Posted by: SantaRosaStan, born in the USA at July 29, 2010 10:02 AM (JrRME)
Posted by: runninrebel at July 29, 2010 10:02 AM (IbnFz)
Posted by: Truman North at July 29, 2010 10:03 AM (e8YaH)
If there were serious enforcement (demonstrated over five years) plus this amendment, I could see myself persuaded to support some kind of large (but not blanket) amnesty for, say, half of the illegals here, those with the longest stays and strongest ties to the country, and say a five year special visa for the rest. But five years and that's that.
It has more complications than conservative principles have, to my knowledge, openly acknowledged.
Offhand, with more consideration needed, my powerless assessment would be that zero consideration of amnesty be given to anyone here illegally.
Posted by: dum blond at July 29, 2010 10:04 AM (gbCNS)
The first 'graf of my 1:59 post was copied from progressoverpeace.
Posted by: MrScribbler at July 29, 2010 10:04 AM (Ulu3i)
Do your own fucking landscaping ( or zero-scape it
Clean your own fucking house
Don't go out to dinner as often ( pick places which use kids, not illegals )
Avoid large hotels / motels ( see above )
Or, just sit back and let this nation be overrun by non-citizens who will turn it into a combination of Juarez, Kowloon, Mumbai, San Salvador, and Manilla
Posted by: SantaRosaStan, born in the USA at July 29, 2010 02:02 PM (JrRME)
+1, and a fukkin'-A on top.
Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 10:04 AM (OlN4e)
You can take that shit and go sell it at stormfront.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at July 29, 2010 02:00 PM (0q2P7)
Mongrel and asshole?
I think they make a cream for that.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 10:04 AM (RkRxq)
Posted by: Barack Obama at July 29, 2010 10:05 AM (VmtE9)
You can take that shit and go sell it at stormfront.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at July 29, 2010 02:00 PM (0q2P7)
The "mongrel" stuff is a play on what The Precedent just said on the View.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 29, 2010 10:05 AM (Qp4DT)
There's a limit? Really? I'm in academia and I don't see it.
Why don't we have a quota of foreign-born law school students? Brits, Australians and some Indians would even get around the language issue.
I think that's a good idea, we need to focus on getting the foreign-born into American law schools.
Posted by: AmishDude at July 29, 2010 10:06 AM (T0NGe)
I'm with you on this one. The birthright is sacrosanct and I think the founders were right in putting it in the constitution. Your solution, I think is a workable one.
Of course the less benefits we give out, the less concern over who pays for what. As for enforcing the border and deporting captured criminals, a no brainer, which of course means the feds will lag on it.
What I don't get is in all this movement for immigration reform, nary a word is said about fixing things for those immigrants who are following the rules and and stuck in a Kafkaesque night-mare that is our current immigration system. We WANT more Americans, particularly the motivated law-abiding kind. We should be helping them first.
Posted by: ElamBend at July 29, 2010 10:07 AM (eXX1a)
I jest, kind of.
Posted by: Stan at July 29, 2010 10:07 AM (9rQOT)
John McCain was seen going from hospital to hospital in Arizona, putting women on a bus, and driving them to mexico right before they had babies.
Vote McCain in 2010
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 10:07 AM (wuv1c)
35 This is all well and good, but my lawn isn't going to mow itself.
My lawn is emo, so it cuts itself
Posted by: s'moron at July 29, 2010 10:07 AM (UaxA0)
I thought the same for his butt buddy, McCain. Never underestimate the American voters' willingness to a) be fooled, b) vote against self-interest, c) embrace ignorance, or d) turn retard.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at July 29, 2010 10:07 AM (swuwV)
A friend had to apply for their newborn's American birth certificate cause the kid was born overseas. It was a pain. Two American parents, but the kid's citizenship had to be applied for? My friend kept saying "this is not right, this is not right". But I could be wrong about some details cause she really wasn't sending out coherent messages at this time, since she was under enormous stess cause there is apparently a time window for this to be done
Posted by: curious at July 29, 2010 10:07 AM (p302b)
Why don't we have a quota of foreign-born law school students? Brits, Australians and some Indians would even get around the language issue.
I think that's a good idea, we need to focus on getting the foreign-born into American law schools.
I was refering more to engineers, scientists, etc.
I don't know if we need more lawyers, but hey.
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 10:08 AM (wuv1c)
I jest, kind of.
I don't. There is an immigration category for "fashion models", I want one for "hot chicks desperate for green cards".
Posted by: AmishDude at July 29, 2010 10:08 AM (T0NGe)
Mexican chicks are hawt..
Oh, yeah, baby! 4 foot 2 and rounder than a blueberry.
HOTHOTHOT
(the mustache usually sends me into orbit, too)
Posted by: s'moron at July 29, 2010 10:08 AM (UaxA0)
Posted by: curious at July 29, 2010 10:09 AM (p302b)
The first 'graf of my 1:59 post was copied from progressoverpeace.
Posted by: MrScribbler at July 29, 2010 02:04 PM (Ulu3i)
That's why I put "-->" on the pasted parts, just in case the italics screw up.
BTW, I meant that the US can fill up on visa overstays (I didn't say "overstay", but that is what I meant) very easily, which is why there is no way to ever actually seal the nation. We will always have many illegals running around. That means that the only policy that means anything, with respect to illegals, is interior enforcement. Everything else is just adjusting the deck chairs.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 29, 2010 10:09 AM (Qp4DT)
Posted by: s'moron at July 29, 2010 02:08 PM (UaxA0)
Those are outliers, and more likely, those are not the single ones.
Posted by: Stan at July 29, 2010 10:10 AM (9rQOT)
Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 10:10 AM (OlN4e)
Why should Rangle go to his hearings? He didn't do anything wrong. He investigated his ethics charges and found nothing.
Posted by: Alpha & Omega Man at July 29, 2010 10:10 AM (uFokq)
That depends, Ace. 5 years ago here in Arkansas I never saw a Mexican, now we're ass deep in them. I don't mean Hispanic Americans, I mean non-English speaking wet backs. We just got a petition signed (77,000+ signatures required) to put a constitutional amendment on next Septembers ballot that forces anyone who wants any kind of government benefits to prove citizenship. Applies to everyone except in cases of emergency and those under 14 yoa. People here are fed up.
Same situation here, I live in Nebraska, not far from Fremont actually. We're not exactly what you'd call a border state, not by a long shot, but we have a very large illegal population - one that is an ever growing drain on our local economy because while they take out of the system, they don't put much back into the system. Their paid in cash, under the table, and their income isn't taxed. So the state and local muncipalities keep having to raise our taxes to help pay for the services that they and their kids use, like public schools, hospitals, etc...
Eventually something is going to break, we just can't keep adding more and more of this without that happening. People here are getting pretty fed up with that too, hence the Fremont law which the pansy city council backed away from out of fear of legal fees.
But I think Fremont (at least it's citizens) is on the right track here, as far as what the feds should do. Look, I don't think anyone thinks we have the resources to round up the multiple millions of illegals roaming our country. But if you cut off their incentive for being here, they will have no choice but to return home.
So the solution, as I see it, is fairly simple overall. You pass a law that makes it a major federal crime to hire someone for a job or to rent to someone who cannot prove either citizenship or resident alien status, and you give it some serious teeth, and enforce the damn thing.
First offense if you get caught employing illegals you pay a huge fine. Second offense, you pay a huge fine and get mandatory jail time. Third offense, you get a major amount of mandatory jail time, no less than 5 years.
Same with landlords who rent to illegals. If there are no jobs and no places to live they will have to return home, there's no incentive for them to stay. Then maybe you can start thinking about putting together a guest worker program that's worth a crap.
Sadly though the odds of that happening aren't good at all, too much pandering on both sides of the aisle at the moment.
Posted by: StuckOnStupid at July 29, 2010 10:11 AM (e8T35)
Posted by: nevergiveup at July 29, 2010 10:11 AM (0GFWk)
I don't know if we need more lawyers, but hey.
Well, we don't need more, but maybe we could work out a trade program.. They send us a couple of guys, we send them the ACLU..
Posted by: StuckOnStupid at July 29, 2010 10:12 AM (e8T35)
Posted by: jellytoast at July 29, 2010 10:13 AM (U8Rfl)
But the ERA was never really all that popular, you know.
Two words:
Phyllis Schlafly
Without her it wold have passed. It was being pushed as the next 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Graham's racist amendment to deport innocent infants? Doesn't have a chance.
Posted by: Ed Anger at July 29, 2010 10:13 AM (7+pP9)
Posted by: curious at July 29, 2010 02:09 PM (p302b)
Why don't you all just mind your own g*dd@mn business?
Posted by: "Good-time" Charlie Rangel at July 29, 2010 10:14 AM (mtAxB)
I think we should make a deal with other nations. If you take one of our politicians and promise they will never be allowed to leave your country, you can send us 5,000 people who we will give automatic citizenship
I think that is a fair trade.
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 10:14 AM (wuv1c)
I don't know if we need more lawyers, but hey.
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 02:08 PM (wuv1c)
Supply and demand, the more lawyers you have, the less they get paid and the fewer of them will be in a position to be our overlords.
I was refering more to engineers, scientists, etc.
Tell me what state you live in. I will look at the local university in the math, CS or EE departments for somebody under the age of 45 who graduated with a Bachelor's from an American university (that is a reasonable threshold for being "American" although pretty weak). Sometimes that information is not easily found, but I'm willing to bet that if I can find it, you would be shocked how low the percentage is.
Americans don't do math, science or engineering anymore. It's for chumps, we'll just import them. Go to law school, young man, that's where the easy money is.
Posted by: AmishDude at July 29, 2010 10:14 AM (T0NGe)
Give us your tired, your hungy, your whores...
Posted by: rdbrewer at July 29, 2010 10:14 AM (1DVez)
Mexico's largest exports for 2010:
1. Illegal drugs
2. Tequila
3. Cleavage
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 02:12 PM (RkRxq)
Number 3 makes the deal.
Amnesty for all!
Posted by: TexasJew at July 29, 2010 10:14 AM (o7kZZ)
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 10:16 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: Daryl Herbert at July 29, 2010 10:16 AM (lvA0V)
The difference is that in the past 2 years he has been censured by three local Republican caucuses for his RINO deeds. So he is started to lose the support of the Party. He hasn't had the support of the actual voting base for a long time.
He was reelected in the primaries last time through chicanery. What's more he actually had to do a runoff because during the initial primary he didn't even get 50% of the vote.
He is in worse shape now that he was in 2008. Mainly because as soon as the election was over he moved hard to the left.
Posted by: Vic at July 29, 2010 10:16 AM (/jbAw)
Posted by: ChicagoJedi at July 29, 2010 10:17 AM (WZFkG)
Vineyard workers are hired in Santa Rosa, twenty miles away; these guys are in a retirement / tourist area with high unemployment and hardly any housing construction ( thanks to the California Coastal Commission ).
What prevents the feds from raiding this blatant violation of federal law?
Posted by: SantaRosaStan, who's found his hill at July 29, 2010 10:17 AM (JrRME)
I jest, kind of.
Posted by: Stan at July 29, 2010 02:07 PM (9rQOT)
Obviously you have seen a very limited number of Mexican women. They can be 'teh hot', but the other 90% of the time they are hotness challenged.
Besides, that hotness factor gets old quick when you have to deal with their idiot families and their looks sharply peak betwen 18-25. I'm talking a very short shelf life on 'the hot' before the weight gain kicks in. On the plus side the vast majority of them seem to be excellent cooks, provided you like Mexican food. If you eat it all the time you will be even fatter than they ever will be.
Posted by: Jim in San Diego at July 29, 2010 10:18 AM (oIp16)
"I want one for "hot chicks desperate for green cards".
A friend once told me of his desire to turn this country into the United States of Hot Asian Chicks. It was gonna be some sort of mega internationl exchange program.
Posted by: Joanie (Oven Gloves) at July 29, 2010 10:18 AM (HaYO4)
Lead paragraph at Politico on Grahamnesty's anchor baby pander:
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) announced Wednesday night that he is considering introducing a constitutional amendment that would change existing law to no longer grant citizenship to the children of immigrants born in the United States.
The actual Grahamnesty quote:
“Birthright citizenship I think is a mistake ... We should change our Constitution and say if you come here illegally and you have a child, that child's automatically not a citizen.”
Notice a word gone missing? Is that the JournoList line Andy Barr? What a partisan hack.
Posted by: motionview at July 29, 2010 10:18 AM (lKDF0)
Not good enough. We know, with oodles of evidence, that this is inadequate. A deported criminal will make a U-turn at the border and return to recommit within hours of deportation. IMO the only solution is to have a lowest tier, lowest cost prison (read NO AMENITIES) to house the doubly-criminal for the defined sentence... and then deport them.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at July 29, 2010 10:19 AM (swuwV)
Posted by: Daryl Herbert at July 29, 2010 02:16 PM (lvA0V)
The SCOTUS cannot strike down a Constitutional amendment.
That said, this amendment is unnecessary (as the 14th already prohibits anchor babies).
Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 29, 2010 10:19 AM (Qp4DT)
114 (I respond to myself)
And I answer, "No, fundamental principles cannot be compromised in any way when they're correct. Unless one is willing to play the game of compromise to achieve only part of a righteous end. And if it's only part, it isn't correct."
Posted by: dum blond at July 29, 2010 10:20 AM (gbCNS)
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 10:21 AM (wuv1c)
Why aren't these protestors--pretending this is a 60s civil rights issue be-in--why aren't they protesting anying Mexico does?
They found a mass grave just outside Juarez last week, for example. Mass effing grave.
All the murders, corruption.
Posted by: rdbrewer at July 29, 2010 10:21 AM (1DVez)
Somewhat O/T..
I have a few ideas about this...
Upon reading the outdated and ancient form of media formally called a "newspaper" the other day, i stumbled across a story about a young illegal alien (undocumented democrat) who was attending college and had recieved student loans for said college. The story was written by the Arizona Republic (although i call it the arizona repugnant) to make this illegal out to be some sort of hero. He was planning on going back to mexico and coming in "the right way." Now this sounds good in theory, but my bigger issue is the fact that he has been taking MY tax money to pay for himself his entire life.
To clarify my poin, I think if somewhere down the road we are faced with an amnesty bill, we should fight to have a clause put in that says in order to receive citizenship you have to repay every single dime that you took out of the taxpayers wallets before you are a legal citizen. Give them a minimum wage job ($7.25 in AZ) But only pay them at a rate of 4 dollars an hour like they would be getting now. The rest will go into their repayment plan for suckling the teat of the taxpayer.
Now being from Arizona myself yesterday was a devastating day for me. The injuction placed on sb1070 truly depressed me to the point i couldnt eat. Now what i think Jan should do at this point is declare the border an emergency zone, put AZ in a state of emergency and deploy as many AZ national guard troops as we can to the border and circumvent the courts. Im sure that there has been enough crime to justify a state of emergency for arizona. I personally have been broken into 3 times (2 times in my new house 1 time in my old house) and I live in a nice neighborhood. The only question is how much spine does Jan have.
Posted by: Conservative from nAZi at July 29, 2010 10:22 AM (SebJz)
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 02:16 PM (wuv1c)
Not so much, Ben. With no manufacturing, you don't need engineers, other than for infrastructure and public construction, and even there the regulations you have to follow limit how much actual engineering is needed. Manufacturing is being chased out of this country by not the least of which is the government. Manufacturing exploits poor people and pollutes the environment donchaknow? With no drilling in the gulf, you probably don't need many petroleum engineers there, for example.
Anyway, I think we are quite capable of training all the professionals we need without importing. We aren't really short of people, maybe smart people, but the whole world is populated by idiots, anyway.
Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 10:22 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: rdbrewer at July 29, 2010 10:23 AM (1DVez)
Posted by: dagny at July 29, 2010 10:23 AM (/jVLU)
They found a mass grave just outside Juarez last week, for example. Mass effing grave.
All the murders, corruption.
Posted by: rdbrewer at July 29, 2010 02:21 PM (1DVez)
Well, it's certainly helped with the parking in downtown Juarez, I noticed
Posted by: TexasJew at July 29, 2010 10:23 AM (o7kZZ)
Posted by: doom_n_gloom at July 29, 2010 10:23 AM (LNOg6)
Posted by: ChicagoJedi at July 29, 2010 10:24 AM (WZFkG)
It's a disaster for the population at large. Instead of being well-informed and intellectually diverse, we're becoming lazy women's studies majors. It happened to Rome. They couldn't be bothered with the hard work, so they just exploited others' and mooched off of it.
It didn't turn out well.
When one specialization is farmed out to people who have no particular tie to the nation they work in, you end up with an unhealthy society.
A society of lawyers.
We don't need a country where science is for chumps.
Posted by: AmishDude at July 29, 2010 10:24 AM (T0NGe)
Anyway, I think we are quite capable of training all the professionals we need without importing. We aren't really short of people, maybe smart people, but the whole world is populated by idiots, anyway.
you're also missing the other benefit. By taking the smartest from other countries, we are putting them at a competative disadvantage.
We will always need engineers and scientists. Also we still do a TON of manufacturing, it just isn't your grandfathers assembly line manufacturing. It is electronics, computers, but also steel, mining, metals, etc.
For every machine that enters the assembly line process, we need an engineer to design it, maintain it, fix it, etc.
I have no problem letting the scientifically and mathematically educated into out country.
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 10:25 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: ErikW at July 29, 2010 10:26 AM (fDRif)
When one specialization is farmed out to people who have no particular tie to the nation they work in, you end up with an unhealthy society.
After a generation they will be as american as you or I. I am not saying import them as indians in america, or germans in america, import them and make them americans.
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 10:26 AM (wuv1c)
Nearly 5k Americans killed each day by illegals.
What's the rush.
that can't be true, that would be 1.825 million people
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 01:39 PM (wuv1c)
You're right obviously. My mistake. It is twelve a day though and >4.3k deaths a year.
Still a large number, imo.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 10:27 AM (RkRxq)
Posted by: ChicagoJedi at July 29, 2010 10:27 AM (WZFkG)
A society of lawyers.
We don't need a country where science is for chumps.
you're right, but not letting in educated immigrants isn't going to motivate the lazy to all of the sudden become scientists. It isn't an either or proposition.
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 10:27 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: willow at July 29, 2010 10:28 AM (SbsTp)
I don't know about you guys, but Mexican chicks are hawt... Amnesty for all the single ladies.
There would have to be an expiration date. Those hawt Mexican chicks tend to turn into porky Mexican middle-aged women. Linda Rondstadt, I'm lookin' at you.
Posted by: Cicero at July 29, 2010 10:29 AM (QKKT0)
Of course, we shouldn't have to "trade" anything for it because it was created out of whole cloth by a bogus interpretation of law by some assholes in black robes, but...
Posted by: the peanut gallery at July 29, 2010 10:29 AM (NurK6)
Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 10:29 AM (OlN4e)
Watch me.
Posted by: Wise Latina at July 29, 2010 02:28 PM (T0NGe)
You're just going to empathize it away. A distinction without a difference, perhaps.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 29, 2010 10:30 AM (Qp4DT)
You're right obviously. My mistake. It is twelve a day though and >4.3k deaths a year.
yeah mistakes happen.
It's just when i read that number i thought about the Women's Right's groups that used to always say a million women a year died from domestic abuse between 1970 and 2000. And someone had to point out that no, 30 million women didn't die in that time period from domestic abuse, because someone, you know, would have noticed that many death.
If 1.825 million americans were killed by illegals every year our border would like more like the north and south korean border
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 10:30 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: ChicagoJedi at July 29, 2010 10:30 AM (WZFkG)
There would have to be an expiration date. Those hawt Mexican chicks tend to turn into porky Mexican middle-aged women. Linda Rondstadt, I'm lookin' at you.
Posted by: Cicero at July 29, 2010 02:29 PM (QKKT0)
alright I'm going to have a knee jerk moment as a woman.
many of us do with age, of any ethnicity..
(not me of course)
Posted by: willow at July 29, 2010 10:31 AM (SbsTp)
Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 10:32 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: Cicero at July 29, 2010 02:29 PM (QKKT0)
Raquel WelshVictoria Principal
Vickie Carr
I'll stand up for those chicas..
Posted by: TexasJew at July 29, 2010 10:33 AM (o7kZZ)
That said, this amendment is unnecessary (as the 14th already prohibits anchor babies).
Give us a couple months.
Posted by: Sotomayor, Kagan, and Ginsburg at July 29, 2010 10:34 AM (e8YaH)
Supply and demand. If you were to (I don't advocate this) cut off all immigration for science and engineering jobs, the wages for such jobs would skyrocket, it would be a more desirable profession and more people would seek it out.
If it is true that there are smart lawyers (I'm skeptical), then higher wages in engineering would convince several of them to have sought it out as a profession, rather than wussing it out in a graduate program with no math, no dissertation and no foreign competition.
Not only is it simple supply and demand, but the fact that an employer can use the immigration system itself and the threat of having the visa end to pay the immigrant even less depresses wages.
Posted by: Wise Latina at July 29, 2010 10:34 AM (T0NGe)
If 1.825 million americans were killed by illegals every year our border would like more like the north and south korean border
Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 02:30 PM (wuv1c)
You're right and I am (sincerely) chagrined. Sometimes my fingers outpace my train (of thought). I need to be more careful.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 10:35 AM (RkRxq)
maddog, i said it seems. why did i say it, because it is an ugly visual for many ., (ok maybe just me)
go After those that Benefit most! the employers! The International Unions! etc..
heck the Dem party that faccilitate breaking our laws ! willfully!
they are the Americans breaking our laws !
maybe just ignore me. i'll understand.
Posted by: willow at July 29, 2010 10:35 AM (SbsTp)
we are quite
capable of training all the professionals we need without importing. We
aren't really short of people
Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 02:22 PM (OlN4e)
For all of our history until the past four decades, America was able to find enough engineers, scientists, etc--enough to create the most successful economy, win WWII, etc, etc. Reagan was right: American was that 'shining city on a hill'
We don't need to suck in people from the rest of the world--all they do is take jobs ( lives and careers and opportunities ) from Americans.
Deportation on a gradual scale is VERY possible. The reality of deportation will cause "the Arizona effect": faced with deportation, most illegals will leave and likely illegal immigrants won't come here.
Sometimes, amigos, the problem is muy complex but the solution is simple
Posted by: SantaRosaStan, who's found his hill at July 29, 2010 10:35 AM (JrRME)
Victoria Principal
Vickie Carr
I'll stand up for those chicas..
Posted by: TexasJew at July 29, 2010 02:33 PM (o7kZZ)
I sense a change in the direction of this thread.
P I C T U R E S!
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 10:36 AM (RkRxq)
Posted by: A Soviet Officer at July 29, 2010 10:36 AM (2kfvQ)
Posted by: Jim in San Diego at July 29, 2010 10:37 AM (oIp16)
Deportation on a gradual scale is VERY possible. The reality of deportation will cause "the Arizona effect": faced with deportation, most illegals will leave and likely illegal immigrants won't come here.
Sometimes, amigos, the problem is muy complex but the solution is simple
Posted by: SantaRosaStan, who's found his hill at July 29, 2010 02:35 PM (JrRME)
whew This!
thanks for stating it so much better
Posted by: willow at July 29, 2010 10:38 AM (SbsTp)
Posted by: BlackOrchid at July 29, 2010 10:40 AM (SB0V2)
My idea on controlling immigration along the southern border;
Go to Mexico, copy thier immigration laws, duplicate them for this country.
e.g. 2 yrs in prison - 1st offense, 10 yrs second offense.
(if memory serves)
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 10:40 AM (RkRxq)
Posted by: Jean at July 29, 2010 10:40 AM (XSlA+)
Americans don't do math, science
or engineering anymore. It's for chumps, we'll just import them.
Posted by: AmishDude at July 29, 2010 02:14 PM (T0NGe)
I've done a lot of graduate studies in engineering at UT/Austin (I really need to get that MS Thesis finished, some day!) and whereas it is true that the majority of engineering students are foreign-born, they now tend to return to their homes after graduation.
They see where the opportunities are heading.
Posted by: TexasJew at July 29, 2010 10:40 AM (o7kZZ)
Posted by: ChicagoJedi at July 29, 2010 10:40 AM (WZFkG)
Posted by: JackStraw at July 29, 2010 10:40 AM (VW9/y)
NO AFDC FOR ILLEGALS; NO HOUSING VOUCHERS FOR ILLEGALS; NO TUITION-FREE COLLEGE FOR ILLEGALS; NO MEDICARE FOR ILLEGALS; NO MEDICAL FOR ILLEGALS; etc etc
This is all a political ploy by the Usual Suspects: They want voters and they want the de-White-ification of America. If we let them, they will drown us.
Posted by: SantaRosaStan, who's found his hill at July 29, 2010 10:41 AM (JrRME)
Posted by: willow at July 29, 2010 10:42 AM (SbsTp)
Posted by: SCOTUS 2.0 at July 29, 2010 10:43 AM (swuwV)
Posted by: BlackOrchid at July 29, 2010 10:43 AM (SB0V2)
P I C T U R E S!
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 02:36 PM (RkRxq)
Living here on the border where it is 85+% Mexican, I can tell you that the well-to-do ladies generally keep in good shape. Their Mexican husbands typically take on young mistresses, so there is that kind of competition going on.
It's a cultural thing, and although it is changing, there are many undertones within the society here.
Posted by: TexasJew at July 29, 2010 10:45 AM (o7kZZ)
See my comment #95. I think we have the making of a plan. Put the pressure on the offending countries, not ours.
Posted by: JackStraw at July 29, 2010 02:40 PM (VW9/y)
Ahhh... I see.
That would kick Mexico back to the year 2400
If I were to seriously advocate for that or anything like it, would would still need to deport about 2/3rds of them first, but it looks like we are on the same wavelength.
Posted by: Jim in San Diego at July 29, 2010 10:46 AM (oIp16)
Just a thought... every "desirable" mathematician or scientist who would be given amnesty is just as much a part of the microcosm of humanity as anyone i.e. subject to the destructive ways of liberal thought. Any compromise made for them is, at its fundamental level, all that it ever was: A useless compromise.
Posted by: dum blond at July 29, 2010 10:46 AM (gbCNS)
Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 02:29 PM (OlN4e)
Hallefuckinglujah!! We've had mass deportations before. Operation wetback (not making that up) has been done twice, in the 30's and the 50's. See link below (for some stupid reason I'm too fucking dumb to hot link that). Over a million illegal Mexicans both times. IT CAN BE DONE!
http://tinyurl.com/prtjq
Posted by: Hedgehog at July 29, 2010 10:47 AM (oQIfB)
Hallefuckinglujah!! We've had mass deportations before. Operation wetback (not making that up) has been done twice, in the 30's and the 50's. See link below (for some stupid reason I'm too fucking dumb to hot link that). Over a million illegal Mexicans both times. IT CAN BE DONE!
Posted by: Hedgehog at July 29, 2010 02:47 PM (oQIfB)
Posted by: Jim in San Diego at July 29, 2010 10:50 AM (oIp16)
Posted by: willow at July 29, 2010 02:42 PM (SbsTp)
I don't know what unemployment pays an hour but just say it's $350/wk. That's around nine an hour. That's not much. They just passed a bill for $20 billion to just extend unemployment benefits.
If they offered to pay a million people $15/hr. That would cost $30 billion - for an entire year. Looks to me like a better deal than unemployment.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 10:51 AM (RkRxq)
i also think it should be pointed out
If people are sincere about the status of mexicos citizens , Mexicos elite should be kicked in the teeth for not doing well by their populace. where's the friggen jobs, business , governance that faccilitates this?
if we can go around the world and fight for freedom. why not heckle Mexicos elite?
why not constantly point out they are freaks of humanity to not help their citizens, to run them into other countries for survival
Posted by: willow at July 29, 2010 10:52 AM (SbsTp)
The 14th Amendment was to make sure the children of slaves were US citizens.
NOT the whole damn world.
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at July 29, 2010 10:53 AM (0fzsA)
Please google FS-240.
Your friend was likely talking about this form. It is titled, "Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United States of America."
I've had to produce this document at least twice in my life (once service-related and once for a background investigation), and I was born in the late 60s. Both times were before Clinton took office.
Posted by: MikeO at July 29, 2010 10:53 AM (lBmZl)
But seriously all it would take is to eliminate all the welfare and start jailing people who hire them and not only will they quit coming, but the ones here will leave on their own.
Posted by: Vic at July 29, 2010 10:54 AM (/jbAw)
It's a cultural thing, and although it is changing, there are many undertones within the society here.
Posted by: TexasJew at July 29, 2010 02:45 PM (o7kZZ)
I used to live in Houston (Clear Lake). I remember how it is. I also remember that the Mexicans themselves tended to take pretty sick advantage of their countrymen and women. At least when I was there, there was a lot of underaged forced prostitution. The law tended not to notice so much.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 10:55 AM (RkRxq)
Posted by: JackStraw at July 29, 2010 10:55 AM (VW9/y)
Exactly.
It's bad enough we have to pretend that so many basket-case shitholes around the world are functioning states worthy of exercising sovereignty.
It's at least an order of magnitude worse to share a border with one.
Posted by: MikeO at July 29, 2010 10:56 AM (lBmZl)
Did you guys know that without illegals and the children of illegals sucking at the teet of public assistance and education, California's budget would not only be balanced, but that we would be in the black by 3 billion a year?
You want fiscal restraint and less government spending, then start HERE!
Posted by: Jim in San Diego at July 29, 2010 10:58 AM (oIp16)
Posted by: Rangel/Greene 2012 at July 29, 2010 11:00 AM (sYrWB)
I've said this before but this is what I believe. We don't really know corruption like other countries do. Like the corruption that existed during prohibition in this country.
All of that corruption was because of the massive amount of money the illegal trade generated. Politicians and police who wanted a piece of the action could be bought off.
That kind of corruption exists in a lot of the world, including Mexico.
There is a lot of money being generated by the traffic accross our borders in drugs and illegals.
Why aren't the borders being controlled?
I think it is a distinct possibility that it may be more lucrative for the borders to remain out of control.
And that's just me thinking outloud.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 11:04 AM (RkRxq)
could see myself persuaded to support some kind of large (but not blanket) amnesty for, say, half of the illegals here, those with the longest stays and strongest ties to the country, and say a five year special visa for the rest. But five years and that's that.
That would certainly be the easier path to take and after 5 years just give them the country.
Posted by: Velvet Ambition at July 29, 2010 11:09 AM (lOzze)
It's a cultural thing, and although it is changing, there are many undertones within the society here.
Posted by: TexasJew at July 29, 2010 02:45 PM (o7kZZ)
When I was living and working in the oil patch around Odessa, there was this Hispanic guy I worked with with that habit. Trouble was, he was like 5'-3" and 130 pounds, and his wife was like 5-10 and 280 pounds. You could always tell when one of his girlfriends had called his house, as he would come to work with both lips popped and twin shiners. Even his brother said his balls were bigger than his brain. Heh.
Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 11:09 AM (OlN4e)
One is special-education cost, and the other is trying to teach non-English-speakers, mostly Hispanic.
Posted by: mrkwong at July 29, 2010 12:45 PM (G8Eo0)
It's a show. Talking "amendment" makes him seem serious about the issue, and we know he's not--but it sounds so VERY Senatorial.
Most important, it will take several years to amend the Constitution. He knows that. So in the meantime, he'll demand that we simply grant amnesty to all, with malice towards none.
What a bunch of shit.
Posted by: dad29 at July 29, 2010 01:03 PM (3PS1w)
Posted by: ryukyu at July 29, 2010 01:18 PM (MOHSR)
I apologize for calling you a bigot. If President Barry can use the term "mongrel" on people, then it must now be magically a non-bigot term ...unless a melanin deficient person uses it of course.
I must watch The View more often ( then never ) to keep up on proper political correctness. My bad.
Posted by: Kristopher at July 29, 2010 01:47 PM (kCEOg)
Posted by: denny crane at July 29, 2010 02:18 PM (I+7Zv)
If there were serious enforcement (demonstrated over five years) plus this amendment, I could see myself persuaded to support some kind of large (but not blanket) amnesty for, say, half of the illegals here, those with the longest stays and strongest ties to the country, and say a five year special visa for the rest. But five years and that's that.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
BS. They all have to go or we will just repeat this insanity over and over again. by the way, 12 million is a low ball estimate...more like 30 million!
Posted by: gonzotx at July 29, 2010 02:35 PM (1kwr2)
I don't believe a single fucking word of it.
I'm supposed to take this at face value? From a guy who has opposed every single attempt at controlling illegal aliens?
No fucking way. Zero cred.
Posted by: memomachine at July 29, 2010 02:48 PM (MwCol)
i hate Tepublicans just like Jesus loves me. Yes I'm an idiot, thanks for noticing.
Posted by: dummy crane at July 29, 2010 03:02 PM (f7A+e)
"BS. They all have to go or we will just repeat this insanity over and over again. by the way, 12 million is a low ball estimate...more like 30 million!"
Bravo! You'd think everyone would have learned from the last amnesty. Granting (any) amnesty will just encourage more illegals in the future. AND we wound up getting 4X the number supposedly granted amnesty. Couldn't break up the families (back in their home country), ya know.
I've been there, done that, and I remember. NO AMNESTY FOR ANY.
Posted by: MDr at July 29, 2010 03:13 PM (ucq49)
" those with the longest stays and strongest ties to the country"
We're giving tenure to illegals now? I was here first I win? How about we give it to those that speek the best english, have the highest education, or at least look the best. We have plenty of uneducated ugly people already.
Posted by: nate at July 29, 2010 03:50 PM (bxSU2)
Posted by: 5th Level Fighter at July 29, 2010 04:51 PM (SgL5z)
Posted by: Henry Hawkins at July 29, 2010 04:58 PM (1neAq)
Posted by: torabora at July 29, 2010 05:14 PM (xGqdR)
Posted by: yixing teapots at July 30, 2010 12:25 AM (6ZwMD)
Posted by: Dw Pepper at July 30, 2010 04:35 AM (z3PA0)
many fendi products for discount
high quality of fendi bags for cheap
Posted by: fendi handbags at July 30, 2010 06:42 PM (AvlwO)
A friend had to apply for their newborn's American birth certificate cause the kid was born overseas. It was a pain. Two American parents, but the kid's citizenship had to be applied for? My friend kept saying "this is not right, this is not right". But I could be wrong about some details cause she really wasn't sending out coherent messages at this time, since she was under enormous stess cause there is apparently a time window for this to be done
I'm living in China and married to a Chinese citizen. When our son was born here, I simply went to the nearest US consulate and filled out the necessary paperwork to register our son as a US citizen. A few weeks later, we received his US passport, so now he's a US citizen. It was a fairly painless procedure.
Now, we have had much more trouble obtaining approval for a nonimmigrant visa for my wife to visit the US. But interestingly enough, it was easier to receive the immigrant visa/green card (just more procedural hoops to jump through).
Posted by: Chinaacid at July 30, 2010 08:34 PM (g/EUm)
This is a con-job.
Sure, he can say no more anchor babies...
But after amnesty, there will be nobody here illegally, hence, no more anchor babies anyway.
Posted by: Harvey at July 30, 2010 09:26 PM (0S/FC)
Posted by: Windows プロダクトキー at June 14, 2011 11:49 PM (Z9uo6)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2583 seconds, 376 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Just because your child is a citizen does not mean we want you, Mr and Mrs Criminal.
End parental rights over the child, put the child in foster care, then imprison the parents and deport them.
Posted by: Kristopher at July 29, 2010 09:25 AM (kCEOg)