Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

Dawn, the way I remember it (and my memory’s pretty good), both Bush AND Kerry said the borders should be better controlled.

But it was Kerry that brought up the real solution: “The second thing we need is to crack down on illegal hiring. It’s against the law in the United States to hire people illegally, and we ought to be enforcing that law properly.”

If illegals can’t get a job here, they’ll stop coming here.

The business lobby doesn’t want the government to close the borders to cheap labor, so they’re throwing around the campaign contributions to keep the cheap undocumanted labor flowing - along with everything else it’s bringing.

If illegals can’t get a job here, they’ll stop coming here.

And that will never happen; welcome to Prohibition. I say welcome the illegal immigrants with work permits because everyone wins in the end. We get cheap labor, the illegals are welcomed to the United States, and (this is the important part) it’s legally sanctioned and monitered by the Federal Government.

GREAT post Dawn
ALL illegal immigrants are breaking the law and are criminals. They should be dealt with as being criminals.
In order to keep their diseases and crime out of our country, they should be dealt with as being violent criminals.
Anybody who hires or aids them should also be charged.
You either enter American soil the right way or you put your life on the line.
That is the ONLY way to stop the influx of illegals and to lighten the burden of the US taxpayer.

AP,
Maybe it was the approach that was different. It seems to me that their is a push to get people to believe that Bush doesn’t want to secure our border.
Saying it and doing it are two different things.
Kerry has really got to get on some of these issues and stop waiting to become President before he does something.
If he wanted to he could have shown up on the border with the MinuteMan Project and started an enormous drive to protect the border. He has natonal recognition now and could put most issues he is fighting for on the burner but he doesn’t. Why?
Bush has to figure out how to make EVERYONE happy. I am waiting for his stand for what is right. Take the businesses who hire illegals to court, fine them, shut them down.(they did go after WalMart-what happened with that?)
Put the guard on the border - or simply let the volunteers on the border (‘vigilantes’) continue what they are doing. He did call for ALL OF US to help.

On Dobbs it was stated that these workers in the fields make $8 or $9/hr. That is well above minumum wage. It is a pretty good income where I live - not great but better than minimum.

It just doesn’t make a whole lot of sense for people to encourage illegal immigration even if they are saving money in labor costs - it is not just honest, hard working people who come across our border.
What is that gang? ms13 or something? there is an estimate of 10,000 members spread out across the WHOLE country now?

I’m with Brian. My ancestors came to this continent as dirt-poor, illiterate (in some cases), and non-English speaking (in some cases) immigrants. With today’s immigration laws, half of them would never have made it into the country. Nativists have always been wrong in the U.S., and immigrants have always been good for the country. The most “American” virtues - hard work, independence, and a focus on children - are best characterized among immigrants.

Should we complete the border fence? Of course. But we should create another mechanism, whether a guest-worker program or some other means, of getting as many people into America as we possibly can. This is a great country - let’s share it.

Alternately, if you don’t like immigration, vote with your feet. Go back to Wales or Norway or Nigeria or Italy or wherever your own ancestors came from. Funny how that doesn’t sound so appealing, huh?

It seems to me that when we make something desirable illegal, the result is usually that the criminal elements are the ones who take over.

I say the guest worker program, or even making it easier to actually get resident status, is the way to go. That will do a number of good things.

First, it will allow more control over those who we let enter. If most desperate or brave people who would immigrate illegally had the choice to do so legally, I bet they would.

Second, if we allow families to enter legally, it would diminish the outflow of US cash going to the home country. If you bring your family with you, the cash stays in the US. Plus, families are more likely to be stable and productive.

There is clearly much more demand for these workers than is accounted for by our current immigration policy. They may even save social security for us.

I say, they’re going to come, let’s make it legal, fair, and regulated. Doesn’t the Statue of Liberty say “give me your poor”? Still a good idea, I think.

I’m with AP on this one.

Dawn:
Take the businesses who hire illegals to court, fine them, shut them down.(they did go after WalMart-what happened with that?)

They got off easy with an 11 million dollar settlement — and did not admit to any wrongdoing as part of that settlement, even though it was happening in 21 states.

Another bonus of legal immigration is that we can check the immigrants before they bring all those nasty diseases into our nation and make wure that those infected are properly treated and/or cured before entering our country.

Little off topic, but since we’ve already mentioned Walmart, here’s a good article discussing the world�s largest profit-making corporation in the world.

There is not much business or gov’t incentive to really deal with the border problem.

Illegal immigrants, with false social security numbers, are paying an estimated $7 billion in social security taxes that they will never collect (only the valid SSN holder collects on their contributions). Their contributions account for about 10% of the current surplus. They also pay another $1.5 billion in medicare taxes.

Why would this cash starved government stop that?

I agree with Chops, we’ve had wave after wave of immigrant groups and related backlash by Nativists against each group. Our greatest natural resource has been the ability to attract the hungriest, most aggressive human talent on the planet, which has forced everyone already here to improve or be replaced. It’s not comfortable or even pleasant, but it replenishes our country, because the CHILDREN of immigrants, that first and second generation, consistently outperform all other segments - more education, more entrepreneurship, and certainly the most success relative to the station in life they began in.

For Warren, quite a bit of our increase in long conquered diseases has to do with Americans TRAVELING to other countries and bringing the diseases back. Improving conditions in the third world countries is the key to your concern. FYI, the bird flu concern here last year was caused by highly educated, legal travelers to East Asia, not poor immigrants with ‘nasty diseases’.

Rusty,

To me, the reason for these diseases is both travellers and illegal immigrants. I agree that we should improve conditions in developing countries in order to complete the eradication of these diseases. Dawn’s statistics show that these diseases are more prevalent in areas with higher amounts of illigal immigrants; I’d feel much safer knowing that these immigrants all have had a medical inspection before entering the US.

Chops,
Who said they are against immigration as long as it is done legally and responsibly?
I am not against immigration if that is what you thought.

How is it that John Kerry’s name even comes up in this discussion? He resides in New England, where the only border problem they have to worry about is drunk Canadian college students. Face it, this President bought his support from the Hispanics by offering immunity to them. Stop blaming people who do not even have a say in this issue. Face it, the House, the Senate and our President are Republican. If you cannot stop this now, you never will. Ironic that you can find a way to blame the Dems yet have a Republican majority in office. The spin never stops.

Rusty
You say they account for 10% of surplus. You say they pay $1.5 billion in medicare taxes. What you did not say is that many of the 11 million illegals are working for cash. Hence, no taxes. They send the money back to Mexico to buy that nice house or live at a standard better than their neighbors.
As for the Minuteman Project. Great. Border Patrol had no problem with them. Not one complaint. The ACLU and their “experts” were steaking aroung, setting off sensors, and went home with empty note pads. YEAH!!! Way to go MP!!!
This country needs to get out of the welfarism mindset. Columnist Jim Meyers and others report almost identical figures on health care. Last year LA County spent $340 million on uninsured patients and contributed to a $1.2 billion deficit. Texas spent $850 million and Arizona spent $400 million. That came out of taxpayers pockets and provided services for criminals. They are criminals the moment they cross the border. When all the other costs are added in the figure is staggering.
I have two proposals.
I agree with columnist Michael Savage that we should charge Mexico 1 barrell of oil for each illegal alien.
We should dig a huge ditch across the border. Say 200 feet wide and 100 feet deep with unscalable walls.

I like the idea of a legal guest worker program that could be managed and regulated.

Vic,
Spin? Are there no illegals in - what’s that state Kerry represents??
Is he not? a U.S. Senator?
He is not just there for his state or Senators wouldn’t be voting on national issues.
Mainly I mentioned Kerry because I made the assumption that someone here would say - ‘You should have voted for Kerry if you were so concerned.’ It happens here a lot.
Also there have been recent comments by Kerry - maybe someone has a link - where he has spoken out on this.
Nip it.

What right does any US citizens with European ancestry have to be in this land? Let’s not forget that we’re all here against the will of this land’s original inhabitants - Native Indians. What about the diseases we brought here when we came here illegally? How is this double standard acceptable?

I think if you personally are not affected by all the illegals flowing in then shut your trap! Don’t sit around romanticizing the situation because you feel you’re more compassionate than others!!

Dawn,

This is a perfect issue for bi-partisanship and for congress to do what they were elected to do, solve problems.
Both sides know that hispanic’s are the largest minority in America now, both sides know that unregulated illegals are a problem and neither side wants to anger hispanics.

Set up a bipartisan panel in both houses of congress to come up with a plan that is legal, fair, and managable. Everyone could win on this one.

Brando
I was born here, My ancestry is Scotland, England, Ireland, German and Netherlands. Your comment is an insult to all who were born as United States citizens and that includes millions of Hispanic ancestry. Immigration then is not what immigration is now. There is no double standard. The laws of the land are that there is a process to coming to this country. There are many Hispanics that legally immigrate to this country every year. Many Hispanics living here are angry with the illegal aliens. In the news, week after week, there are reports of violent crimes committed by “Mexican nationals”. One of their first crimes was to enter this country illegally. One of their next crimes was to create violence against citizens in this country. That is reason enough to severly tighten the borders.

“How is this double standard acceptable?”

Could it be because this land’s original inhabitants - Native Indians, were conquered?
Or maybe because that was hundreds of years ago and this is today?

They are NOW Americans. If they don’t like it they can go to mexico. Sounds like they have plenty of room.

Traci
I cannot speak for others. I live in Arizona. I am directly affected daily. Telling people to shut their trap is a real flame thrower. Go light a match somewhere else.

Hi! Just wanted to let everyone know about the website www.slick.com You should really check it out. They publish a magazine called “Slick Times” along with some really funny money.

They have just recently released a new 5 “dolares” bill. According to a News release, this new “money” both parodies and protests porous borders. You should really check it out.

They also have several different bills available for purchase. Just go to www.slick.com to view them all!

I hope you all enjoy them as much as I did!

Tom,

I was born here too. My ancestors came here in the 1930’s from Italy - I apologize if you feel insulted as no insult was intended. My point is, what makes this country great is it’s immigrants and to scorn them is to scorn ourselves. This of course doesn’t excuse immigrants who commit crimes but it doesn’t legitimize the elitist Us vs Them attitude that many US born citizens bear. Us = Them.

Tom-
If you do not mind the rest of the world making decisions for you that is your perogative, but I on the other hand do not, It’s the same principle as a womans right over her own body(not to open another can of worms, just an analogy)!! I just do not want to speak on behalf of families that have lost loved ones because of an illegals crime! Yes I am aware that legals commit crime also, so lets not take that route.

Traci
I have been aroung long enough to know who makes decisions on my behalf and when to make them on my own. Illegal aliens whether they are middle easterners, asians, hispanic or whatever their point of origin are criminals the moment they cross into the US. They should be prosecuted. As serious as the problem is, they could be sentenced to hard labor and their mission would be to build another prison for those that follow.

I’m sure I speak for my ancestors and Tom’s as well when I say that they were probably desperate enough to taste America that if it were illegal they would have done it anyways. It’s a bit disheartening to think that American’s who are here by the virtue of immigration can turn on the following generations and speak of imprisoning them for their want of the same freedom. Deporting them? Sure. But imprisoning them? Your proposal perverts the American dream into a nightmare. It’s a selfish, elitist attitude; now that we’re here, make it impossible to share.

I say that we make it easier to come here legally, and then actually enforce the immigration laws. (How many people would come here illegally if it weren’t so difficult to come legally)

Now, what can be done to make legal immigration easier. I honestly don’t know the process well enough to make a suggestion on that. And as to enforcing immigration laws (deporting, not just dump them on the other side of the border but somewhere in the middle of mexico), that requires a great deal of manpower and possibly some sort of barrier at the border.

SirisC-
A big misconception is that legal immigration is difficult! It is not if you’ve kept your nose clean and those who have not are not wanted anyways!! By the way immigrants are not unwanted pets- no matter how far you drop them off they will find their way back!!

Tom, I also live in Az.

This isn’t just illegal immigration, this is an invasion. The jobs that are being taken aren’t just fast food, gardening, and farm work.
Tradesmen such as carpenters, plumers, masons, etc… are being replaced by low wage immigrants. How do you think your houses are being built. I have seen illegals as far east as the Carolinas, so don’t think that this is only a regional problem.
Oh and BTW, we can’t use the Guard their all in Iraq.

It’s all pie in the sky. We can’t control those illegally entering or those who overstay their visas. How will opening up the borders make it any better? We are on the verge of becoming a third world country through attrition or a bleeding of our GDP for the sake of cheap labor. All of this falls on the back of middle America, not the corporations. Take away the incentives and enticements and they will think twice about coming here illegally.

Brando
I don’t know what state you live in. And I don’t know what city Rocky lives in here in AZ. But Rocky does have feeling for the problem. The illegals trespass on people’s property and kill their livestock and fowls. They break into people’s homes and steal. On occasion before they hit Phoenix they will involve themselves in violence to AZ citizens. We do not need illegal aliens for any reason, period. Legal immigration is living by the law and is welcomed.

Everyone here is conveniently forgetting what culpability the United States has in creating the Mexican immigration “problem” to begin with. The creation of NAFTA and the subsequent destruction of Mexican agriculture lands, in the end, created a segment of people without any ability to earn a living. As is well known, the level of subsidization that American grain gets essentially undercuts the international grain market—including Mexico’s grain. Hence, the grain that had been produced by Mexico and which sustained the Mexican people prior to NAFTA (and which prevented mass immigration) is no longer there thanks to the good ole’ U.S. of A. Just thought you guys should know.

Ant,

No offence meant pal, but your “segment of people” is now numbering in the millions.

I could see this if it was a refugee situation. For the most part, reading the report of the Colinas, it would seem that things aren’t much better here than back home.

Tom,

You forgot to mention uninsured drivers, neighborhood gangs etc….
I live in East Phoenix, and down the street from me is a Home Depot, where, on any given day you may or may not be able to get into the parking lot because of the glut of unemployed illegals looking for work.

Is it their fault that they can’t find work in either Mexico or the US? Is it their fault that America’s free trade policy has made almost all Mexican manufacturing and agriculture obsolete? Is it their fault that they were not born in the most powerful country in the world? As far as I know, it is not.

Anyone here who is opposed to illegal immigration on the grounds that it causes unrest and violence, wouldn’t you fight to ensure that your wife and children back at home could get a decent meal at night? If you were placed in a near starvation status caused by the near impossibility of finding work in your native country, wouldn’t you do anything to find that job that you and your family so desparately need?

Don’t tell me that they should accept their situation and starve to death, based on Christian self-sacrificial grounds. These people have just the same “right to life” as an unborn child, if not more. Why is it that we will fight for the rights of those who “can’t speak for themselves” and not for those who come to this country desparately looking for a job? Can they speak for themselves against the threat of American economic imperialism in the Western Hemisphere?

Dawn -

You said in your comment:

Who said they are against immigration as long as it is done legally and responsibly? I am not against immigration if that is what you thought.

You said that illegal immigrants were taking American jobs (actually, you cited Lou Dobbs, America’s walking, talking one-stringed fiddle). If we block illegal crossings but increase the quotas to pick up the slack, then those same folks will come here and take the same jobs. That would make you against increased immigration, if not immigration per se.

I think the divergence between our respective views is that you view illegal immigration as a serious problem, whereas I view it as a minor paperwork problem. As a conservative (i.e. market-oriented) economist, I believe the world would be best off with a minimum of obstacles to the movement of people as well as goods. There are some benefits to having some barriers, for instance, the labor shortage pushes faster technological change and the stability makes investors more confident. But compared to where the world stands now, a lot more flexibility would be beneficial.

Until laws are changed illegal immigration is….well…”illegal”. We are a country of laws. If we aren’t going to enforce the laws then trash them. Some of you may think that is a good idea. There were reasons the law was passed. Can someone tell me those?

The illegals themselves aren’t the problem. They are only trying to better themselves. however, many of the illegals…not all mind you…resort to other “illegal” activities.

We’ve got two issues here. First, illegal immigration and second (and most importantly) VERY porus borders. Does that sound secure to you? I am MUCH more concerned with security than the actual illegal immigration. However, if we solve the porous borders we will, in essence, solve the illegal immigration. We would actually be able to administer and monitor a “guest worker” program. Call me crazy but I think this is a MAJOR security problem. Whether you are a dem or repub I think we both agree that our tax dollars should FIRST and FOREMOST be spent protecting us…the US citizen.

All I can hear from Bush activist is….We haven’t had another terrorist attack, have we?

The answer of course is “no”. However, how long were the 911 terrorist hear before they actually acted. They planned for a VERY long time. It’s easy access into America. Once here…fit in with the crowd and plan….and wait….and?

I’m sick and tired of hearing we are secure, that we are fighting an offensive battle, that no attack has occured since 911. Are we tempting fate? I urge each of you to contact your congressmen and demand action on porus boarders. It’s okay to fight offensive but we should never quit playing defense as well. I’ve seen VERY few teams that won the game by playing only one side of the game.

Ryan
That old fashioned American imperialism crap went out the door before you were probably born. Read something from both sides from authors that have some credibility. This country is big enough and powerful enough to own the world if we wanted to. But that is not the case. People breaking the law must be dealt with. That includes those who hire them knowing they are illegally in this country. Why not have industry build more factories in Mexico. Why don’t we train people who live in Mexico how to raise croops and farm the land. They have a very wide spread of land to achieve both of those ideas and have plenty of land left over.
Rocky
You know very well the problems the illegals bring here. When I lived in Phoenix, one of the places I lived was at 10th Street and Indian School. The war zone. I think you will agree with me that the further away from the problem the harder it is to understand it.

The reason we haven’t had a terrorist attack in the US since September, 2001
is that the terrorists are having to much fun killing our troops in Iraq.

This is one subject that I am completely dissapointed with George W Bush about. Not only has he not done anything about securing the border, but he has done nothing to deter companies from hiring illegal aliens.

Even though I agreed with the war in Iraq I think it is extremely appaling that he is willing to commit troops to die at war, but he is not willing to secure our own border to keep our country safe.

George W Bush could learn his lesson the hard way on this if terrorists are able to penetrate the US-mexican border. Thank God for the minuteman project and the extraordinary work they have done. They have brought attention to the problem, awareness to the lack of action and they have shown that the problem is not as difficult to resolve as the President wants us to think.

I find it amusing that the treatment of Native Americans is justified because they were conquered. By that reasoning, the Mexican Immigration Invasion is perfectly justified. The Hispanics ARE conquering the Whites. Pretty soon the ONLY vote that matters will be the Hispanic Vote.

I wonder if Reservations are in order?

Aldous,

Table for two please.

Tom

Then you know the Home Depot.
I live at 36th st and Indian School. Unfortunatly we own the home. Of the original homeowners in our neiborhood only three are left. We inherited the house from my wife’s mother also an original. When we moved here in ‘74 you didn’t want to live south of McDowell, now the line is north of us and moving fast.

this was the Indian’s and Mexican’s land, you invaded it, took it,raped it, now that it’s your turn to get pushed out, YOUR PISSED OFF??. your people came in BOATLOADS, WITH DISEASES,CREATED SLUMS, NO ONE SAID “WE’RE ALL FULL.” If you pay an American $9.00 an hour plus benefits to pick oranges in the hot California sun, (if you can find someone to do it, white people make up most of the majority on welfare,) when you go to the store, oranges wont cost 10 for a dollar……i am a Hispanic conservative, but i just wanted to give you something to think about, most military experts say it will take 3 divisions to control the border,we don’t have that many to spare, but if we pulled out of Europe, we could at least do something……

There are some people out there who need to read the history books, written by responsible historians, instead of creating their own spin on history. “Created slums”? There weren’t enough people to make a slum. Those people had to rely on themselves to get along in life. There wasn’t any dole for them. They worked the land and there were times that the Indian and the newcomer made friends. It was not a matter of conquering anything. There was plenty of everything for all who would put their hand to the ploy and don’t look back.

Jacob,

There was no such thing as a “Mexican” before the Spanish took over the area. It was all native tribes from Canada to Central America.
Study your history.
Yes, there were great civilizations here before the Spanish, French, and British. All of them fell.
The “Mexicans” lost the Mexican-American war.

The immigrants in my area are taking skilled high paying jobs and working for less money.
Hardly picking oranges.

Illegal imigration across the U.S./ Mexico boarder (and any other point) need to be eliminated. Security along the boarders need to be enforced. Illegal immigrants not only bring disease, they also bring drugs, and crime. Aleins often use “I dont speak English” to try and get out of being arrested. That excuse is not always true. It is not different than when a white or black man is being difficult or is not cooperating.

Yes, using illegals is cheap labor. But that cheap labor lives in American homes. Have you see an Illegals home before? They are often recked down, tall grass, missing windows because of the low income from the “cheap Labor”. It is an eye-sore. With the cheap labor, comes more poverty, lower standards of living, and more taxes due to welfare. With a rising population and lower imployment (mostly caused by American business sending jobs overseas)it is effecting the entire nation in one way or another. As I said most of the unemployment is caused by American businesses sending our jobs overseas. More people coming into the country isnt helping the situation.

Also, how are we soppose to keep track of aleins the same as we do an average American?

Here is my solution.
1. Make all immigration manditory to go through passports and visas.

2. Improve security along the boarder.

3. Once a alein crosses the boarder Ilegally they are to be shot by a trained sharp shooter with rubber bullets. (excluding children). After they are captured, transport them to a nearby jail. Return them to Mexico asap.

Drastice measures are needed to prevent this growing problem although death is not the answer. There are many other “politically Correct” ways to go about this situation.

Illegal Immigrants aswell as anyone who hides or helps them should be punished to the fullest extent.

Dawn, great topic, and for once, you and I agree entirely. I have been calling for closing our borders except to legal traffic since 9/11. Prior to 9/11, we used the oceans to largely protect us from European, Middle Eastern, and Asian terrorist attacks. After 9/11, whether we wanted to see it this way or not, we became linked to terrorism wherever it spawns from through our open borders.

It is long past time Bush, GOP, and Democrats get on with the most fundamental purposes of their being elected, to protect and defend our American way of life. That simply must include closing our borders and channeling legal ingress/egress through checkpoints.

Nay sayers say our borders are too long. That is BS. We have the technology today to monitor every inch of our national borders. And it would not be an enormous cost to establish regional border response teams of national guard, and coast guard, to respond to signals of illegal intrusion. And the beauty of it is, the cost will go down significantly after the first 1 to 2 years as the world realizes they can’t gain illegal access.

Immediate deportation and short term hard labor camps working on America’s infrastructure, road beautification, and trash pickup as punishment for illegal ingress to our nation will quickly become a deterrent driving down the cost of a closed border enforcement program after the first year or two. It is past time, contact your Congresspersons and President and demand safety and security for Americans in America, while observing the human rights of the criminals attempting to enter illegally. We are a nation of laws, let’s make laws that actually protect us, instead of making us a bigger target in the world.

Tom:

It is you who need to read History. The first Slums existed before 1775 in the City of New York. They were the Irish. Even back then there were moves to prevent the Irish from immigrating to this country.

It is a real shame they failed.

Way to go Dawn, this is an issue that has needed discussion for a long time. Firstly, I want to say to all the anti-Nativists out there, you are all missing one extremely large factor to this equation, and that is language. While there is no official language of the United States, there has historically been efforts made to learn English, by immigrants, once arriving in the States. In the 1830s-1850s we saw this with the Southern and Eastern Europeans and Asians who entered into the United States. While they still retained their culture, they too made a successful effort to learn the national language of business in the United States. That is the difference between all of the Nativists arguments, which I personally think were flawed, and the debate over this current invasion by the Latin American, namely Mexico, nations. The Hispanic population on a whole, especially the illegal population has made little to no effort in intergrating linguistically into the United States. Therefore they simply become foreign invaders, in the sense that they reep our benefits and resources, take over property and all the while, pretending that they are still living in Mexico. We see this especially in Florida, where Miami has become the capitol of Latin America, and they are moving to make Spanish a state language. If we want to combat illegal immigration we should do three things:
-First make English a national language. Every past generation of immigrants have learned to speak English and since this latest generation has shown flagrant disregard to learning the language that is the only efficent means of earning a substantial income and bettering oneself economically, we must the mandate it. For if we do not, we are allowing a population of foreign invaders to suck us dry. By forcing the invaders to learn English, it will a) deter illegal immigration, b) substantially aid legal immigrants in procuring meangingful jobs and c) help to eliminate the sharp and drastic cultural divide that at heart is what is worrying both sides of the argument.
-Secondly, we must secure our borders, as you have all said, but the man power is lacking. Whoever mentioned pulling troops out of Europe and Asia, you’re straight on, that is without question our best option.
-Thirdly, we should bolster NAFTA! The comment was made that NAFTA has made Mexico’s economy obsolete…then I would ask why since the introduction of NAFTA Mexico’s export rate into the US has risen to 70% of their out going products, vastly out weighing all of Europe and Japan. If anything, NAFTA has been helping Mexico and all it needs is further assistance. Lets not create social programs in the United States to help illegals, lets aid social programs in Mexico to help the people who are there and to get them to stay there!

Again, it is important to reiterate, this is not Nationalist agruments. The key difference is that these incoming population of immigrants highly outnumber previous generation in terms of illegals and on top of that they are making no effort to intergrate into society. Yes, we see regions like Chinatowns and Little Italys but in all of those instances, they speak English! We have a massive Asian influence in California, but they all speak English! The point is, when as a people you absorb yourselves into the economic system, governed by the usage of the English language, you come to benefit yourself and the economy, and all of a sudden all these problems about paying lower wages and having influxes of illegal immigrants magically goes away.

David …I find that hard to believe- We never agreed on anything before?

Chops,
When it comes to illegal immigration and job loss in our country Lou Dobbs is the only fiddle in the show - and he’s not on FOX, how’d that happen?

“You said that illegal immigrants were taking American jobs (actually, you cited Lou Dobbs, America’s walking, talking one-stringed fiddle). If we block illegal crossings but increase the quotas to pick up the slack, then those same folks will come here and take the same jobs. That would make you against increased immigration, if not immigration per se.”

I pointed out that those MOST hurt by the massive illegal immigration are hispanics who came legally.
I do not see how that equates to being against immigration.
I also said that a guest worker program would help protect those who want to come here from being exploited.
Apparently they don’t all want to become American citizens - they want a job and money to support a family in Mexico and want to stay Mexicans.

Dawn, that is the beauty of being Independent! One can choose to support issues offered from any party that make sense to the Independent voter! I highly recommend it. Being independent gets one out of the sticky wicket of having to support and defend a party that does not support all of one’s own agenda. It amazes me that fiscal conservatives aren’t leaving the GOP in droves after the abyssmal performance by this President and Congress. But, Americans love to party! :-)

David,
I was an independent until Gore came along.

The key to the problem is enforcing existing
laws against hiring illegal aliens, and
prosecute those that violate the law.
That will eliminate the demand.
Both won’t be easy. But, unless we’re going to
open our borders to everyone, we should do the
job correctly. Governments are obviously
not serious about doing either.
So everyone is breaking the law.

But, it’s an interesting philosophical dilemma.
Citizens of the U.S. are free to move about the
United States.

Why shouldn’t all people be free to move about the planet?
Because, it’s clearly a national security problem,
not to mention many other negative impacts
(disease, crime, illegal aliens with no auto insurance, etc.)

I hear some Arizona residents are patrolling
the border to catch illegal aliens, and some
people call them vigilantes? Did Bush really
say that? That’s quite hypocritical.
Since when was enforcing the law vigilantism?
Something is bass ackwards here.

What’s the point of Homeland Security, if we
have wide-open borders?

So, everyone is breaking the law, and
no one is enforcing the law, and we all do
nothing (except some of the citizens of
Arizona, who ironically, the only ones trying
to enforce the law, are being accused of
being the only ones violating the law)?

None of this means we (Americans) can’t help
neighboring and other countries, but we’re
helping them violate our own laws?

It is either illegal, or it isn’t illegal. Not both.
It shouldn’t matter what anyone thinks is right.
What is right, until it is changed, is the law,
and the law should be enforced.
Either change the law and open all the borders,
or enforce the law, and close the borders.

We can’t do both, and we can’t do nothing
(uh…well…OK, we can and are doing nothing),
but doing neither or doing both
will accomplish what we have now (nothing).

Great topic Dawn!

Spot on comments David and BDB…

Wish I had more to add but it would just be redundant at this point.

One thought: Those who are arguing about the Native American “they were here first” issue.

First off the world has changed since then and to try and compare that with this issue is apples to oranges. Conquering lands in the name of your country was the norm back them. That is not the case now (at least not by the United States).

Hindsight being 20/20 it is easy to find fault in the way things were accomplished then. The reality though is that it did happen, and our ancestors (immigrants, natives, and those who were born here) created over time a fantastic country to live in. It has had and always will have it’s flaws but that does not mean that we look at those flaws in the past and use them as fodder to throw our hands up say “oh well. what goes around comes around”.

One Simple Idea,

Here is the definition of vigilante.

1. One who takes or advocates the taking of law enforcement into one’s own hands.
2. A member of a vigilance committee.

No one is accusing these people of being vigilantes. They are vigilantes.

Please visit the National Libertarian Party home page for more information. http://www.lp.org

reed,

OK. Technically, you’re right.
But, I applaude those Arizona vigilates.
They’re simply enforcing the law, because
the federal and state governments won’t.

The governments are full of do nothing hypocrites.
Most Americans want the borders closed.
The government is not enforcing the law, and
they’re not doing what majority wants,
because they don’t want to lose the Hispanic vote.

Eventually, an incident is going to occur,
and it will be discovered that they easily
traveled across our open borders, and who ever
is in office when it happens again, is going
to be asked: Why were the laws never enforced
to close the borders? The motive is clear;
because they did not want to lose the Hispanic voters.

There’s a lot of talk now in Texas
about the state closing the border.
That’s a good start, but unless all
states close the borders, there are still
wide-open holes in the borders.

reed
they are not vigilantes. They only monitor the traffic of illegal entrants. They then call BP and give them the location, count, etc. They do not make contact with the illegal entrants. If you saw an illegal entrant to your neighbors house and monitored the activity while calling the police, would you be a vigilante? Hardly. Same applies to Minuteman Project.

Someone wouldn’t be classified as a vigilante for only assisting lawenforcment(border patrol), that is what that group is doing, big difference.

What about Cititens’ Arrest Rights ?

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
A citizen’s arrest is an arrest performed by a private citizen, as opposed to a sworn law enforcement officer. The practice dates back to medieval England and the English common law. Sheriffs encouraged ordinary citizens to help apprehend law breakers.

Try moving yourself to another country with no money or plan and see how welcomed you are when you expect them to support you. (Just a different perspective for you)!

The vote - it amazes me that any politician is worried about losing the Hispanic vote because of tightening the border.
Hispanic Americans that I know do not want anyone coming here illegally either. They want everyone to follow the immigration laws the same as they did.

Some cities are now changing the rules for their law enforcement and letting the police ask someone what country they are a citizen of?
They were afraid people wouldn’t cooperate and turn in the bad guys?
An invasion of their privacy maybe? Wouldn’t want to offend someone who isn’t supposed to be here anyway.

Everybody,

What you are talking about is neighborhood watch programs, like when the lazy neighbor hasn’t mowed his lawn for months and the weeds are getting out of hand.

Here is a link to “Vigilante” activities on the border. I will admit that these are extreme cases but lets call a duck a duck.

http://www.adl.org/learn/extremism_in_the_news/White_Supremacy/arizona_border_update52105.htm?LEARN_Cat=Extremism&LEARN_SubCat=Extremism_in_the_News

You may want to use another analogy because the minutemen are helping the lazy neighbor(BP)and the weeds(Illegals) are definately out of hand!

Reed,

Why not site the LA Times as your source to play the race card against anyone wishing to enforce the laws and protect the border?

The just wrote an article about AHhhNold being a raciest and a nazi for wanting the border secured in Calif.

ok, I’ll admit that was a bit cynical. I just said call a duck a duck and stop playing politics with the issue. I just claimed there were armed vigilante groups patrolling the borders outside of law enforcement. Neighborhood watches call the police when they see a criminal breaking into a neighbors house. BIG DIFFERENCE.

If you agree with vigilante activities and you think its the way to go. There are political parties who share your view. Go take part and get those politicians elected. Its a free country.

You could quite easily call the illegals pouring in vigilantes also seeing as they are taking the law into their own hands because they feel they have a right to be here.

Let me clarify my position on border monitoring/patrol. The Minuteman Project rejects those who have an agenda of racial superiority or class hatred. There have been other attempts to patrol the border by other groups in the past. Some of them were of an ilk that were not in support of national security, but with an agenda of hatred to people and groups of people. That was then. The MP is a good group with a good vision and mission.

I think AZ. is a “right to carry” state.

Why not just call them legally armed citizens assisting law enforcment in AZ.?

We shouldn’t imprison or punish illegal aliens;
just prevent them from entering illegally.

Most illegal aliens are not committing violent
crimes against others (for which, they then should be imprisoned);
they’re just trying to escape less favourable conditions of their own country.
And if conditions were more favourable in their
country, they probably wouldn’t want us or anyone else illegaly crossing their borders.

Ideally, it would be nice if all countries on the planet opened
all their borders, and all peoples traveled
freely whereever they wished.

But, the problem is, there will be a mad rush
of huge populations to certain locations, and
the end result will probably be worse than
it was before it all began. Individuals can not
see the ramifications, but history and logic
teaches us what will happen, and that shapes our
behaviour.

The problem is, millions (maybe billions) will immediately move here to the US., over burden
our systems and economy, and we’ll ALL soon be
looking for somewhere else to go (like a hoard of locusts), where things are better.

So, there is a basic fundamental question of morality that needs to be answered?

Do we have a right to secure our borders,
or a larger duty to allow illegal aliens ?
Regardless of the outcome?

People of this country have rights too, and unless someone can give a good argument
as to how citizen’s rights are trumped by the
rights of illegal aliens, then people have the
right to control their borders.
Can we also presume to tell other countries that
they can’t control their own borders, and should allow illegal aliens to come and go as they please?

At any rate, at the moment, the law is the law and should be enforced.
And if the law is wrong, we should change the law. And citizens helping authorized agents of the law are not vigilantes.

After all, on a smaller scale…consider your house and home,
which has boundaries (e.g. doors, walls, a fence, a security system perhaps).

You lock your doors at night and set the security system. Right?

Now look at that on a larger scale.

Get it?

Did that behaviour (above) violate anyone’s rights?
Did you not have the right to secure the boundaries of your home ?

_______________________________
And, by the way, Americans, generously allow many every year to immigrate to this nation.
By not enforcing the law to control our borders, we do a disservice to
those that followed the rules and laws, to immigrate legally. That, if anything, is what is not fair.

I appreciate all the comments, but it seems to me that there is a subsection of the population who want to construct the Berlin Wall or the Great Wall of China to keep the vagrants out. I think we can do better.

I definitely like the ideas of penalizing the businesses who hire illegal immigrants. Hit them where it hurts, in the pocket book. Make it not worth coming to America if there are no jobs for them or we can invest more time and money in Mexico to help develop there economy and infrastructure. There are many ways to combat the problem without resorting to violence and there has been no opinions so far that has changed my opinions that these are vigilante groups patrolling the borders outside of law enforcement.

reed,

I certainly don’t advocate violence or mistreating illegal aliens.
Entering the country illegally is not a crime that warrants that.
But, consider the previous argument considering
our rights to boundaries, and property.

Then explain to us how someone else has the right (not desire or need) to
cross that boundary (e.g. break into my home,
or break into my country)?

Who’s rights have precedence?
Answer that first, so that any argument has some ground to stand on.

reed
Let us put this vigilante stuff to rest. Here are a couple of definitions.
VIGILANTE—a member of a vigilance committee.
VIGILANCE COMMITTEE—a group extralegally assuming authority for summary action professedly to keep order and punish crime because of the alleged lack or failure of the usual law-enforcement agencies.
The MP project is NOT VIGILANTISM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not the same.

The Berlin Wall was the opposite.
To keep them in too; from leaving.

Anyone can leave the U.S. if they want.

tom,

ok ,so I read the charter. The MP project is a “state of mind” and not a vigilante group. I’m not sure what that means. Please explain.

here again is the definition I found.

1. One who takes or advocates the taking of law enforcement into one’s own hands.
2. A member of a vigilance committee.

We can certainly beat around the bush on this issue forever. I don’t want to do this. I don’t believe a Libertarian approach to border control is the way to go about it and will do my part to see that it doesn’t.

BTW - does anyone have any cases (for lack of a better word - vigilateism) outside of Arizona?

reed
The MP has not taken the law into their own hands. Therefore in your world they are vigilantes. They do not belong to a vigalance committee. Therefore they still are not vigilantes. They are simply a group of people in their community that are sick and tired of having their property stolen, overrun, and threatened by someone that is not authorized to be on their property. As the group of illegals go further north many of them commit crimes to get to where they want to be. Many of the illegals are gang members and almost daily on the Phoenix news outlets there is a news item about what the media likes to call undocumented people. They become criminals when the first step is taken illegally on Arizona soil. All the MP is doing is notifying the BP when they observe illegal activity. Short and simple.

I have few if any posts on this, from both sides of the isle, that were racist or wished to build a wall to keep honest workers from coming here LEGALY to do that.

Whatever party someone belongs to, we all need to assure the leadership of that party that this is an issue that must be delt with in a bipartisan manner, and get the freaking politics out of it.

There is nothing wrong with calling a duck a duck, but it must also look, walk, and quack like one.

I see this more like calling an eagle a duck.

| khannsingh wrote:
| It’s all pie in the sky. We can’t control
| those illegally entering or those who
| overstay their visas. How will opening up the
| borders make it any better? We are on the
| verge of becoming a third world country
| through attrition or a bleeding of our GDP
| for the sake of cheap labor.
| All of this falls on the back of middle
| America, not the corporations.
| Take away the incentives and enticements and
| they will think twice about coming here illegally.

Actually, there is a way to easily solve the problem of finding people, whereever they are.

First of all, secure the borders. Then, use
Biometrics for identification.

Now, I know, I know.
All of the “Big Brother is watching You”
Paranoids will come out of the wood work if I
mention Biometrics. Oh my! It’s an invation of privacy!

I’ve always felt, if you’re not doing anything wrong, you’ve got nothing to hide.

But consider the many benefits of Biometrics:

Today, identity theft is growing into a major problem. That could be reduced (or eliminated almost).

Fingerprints, iris scan, retina scan, and/or DNA etc. could be used to track
people, where ever they are.

All Visitors and all citizens will have their biometrics recorded (by the way, this is already being done in the
U.S. and other countries, and it is inevitable).

Then, those biometrics are used to gain access to various locations (e.g. your job, office, home, public buildings, stores & merchants, etc.).

Anyone over-staying their VISA or here illegally will find it difficult to evade detection, hard to hold a job, make purchases, open bank accounts, buy lunch, etc.

And there are numerous other benefits, like knowing where your children are, or have been, or where your automobile is or has been, where criminals are located, or have been, etc.

Of course, no system is perfect, but a driver’s license is easy to fake. And so is a Social Security number, or most any other form of identification (other than Biometrics).

Biometrics, DNA, iris scan, etc. are very hard to fake.

My parting shot on this item
Much has been said. Some I agree with and some I disagree with. What is comes down to is securing the border is an absolute necessity. Prosecuting violators is an absolute necessity.
Those that are here now must be rounded up and sent home.
One Simple Idea
You are right that identification of people outside of American citizenship must be done. The manner in which it is done will be another debate. Rhetoric is ok for light talk but when the problems are to solved then sharp definition of vision and mission must be made.
See ya’ll on another post.

“now that it’s your turn to get pushed out”

jacob, we know its an invasion just like you said, that is why those of us with half a brain are really PISSED OFF about it.
Just feel lucky that there are level headed people out there because if it was up to me, I would authorize the use of deadly force to stop EVERYONE from entering this country ILLEGALLY.
And quit whining about the indians. It has nothing to do with illegal immigration.

kctim,

“autourize the use of deadly force” ?

Against people simply (and understandably) hoping to find a job
here to make more money
(i.e. most of them anyway, not all) ?

While I want the borders closed,
perhaps saying “authorize the use of deadly force”
is hurting the cause, more than helping
the cause (to get the borders closed).

But, even more important, punishment should
be proportionate with the crime.
Force is not justified, unless they resist arrest.
And, even then, I don’t think I’d shoot them. Would you? Really?
Perhaps you were just kidding.
And, if we successfully close the borders, punishment
of the illegal aliens is less of an issue.

If you want to punish someone with some
serious jail time and fines, prosecute the
companies (such as Walmart, Papadeaux’s,
countless restaurants, etc.) hiring illegal
aliens, because those businesses are the ones
that are infringing upon the rights of other
Americans, possibly endangering other Americans.

However, for illegal aliens that get caught in
the U.S. committing other crimes (aside from
just being here), yes, by all means, prosecute
them, put them in prison, and put them to work too,
to pay for their own expenses.
And when their prison term is over, send them back to the
country they came from (and get their biometrics
before you return them), and disallow that person
the possibility of ever getting legal immigration.

I don’t think anyone has mentioned this above, but freaking out for “the sake of our children” about malaria, TB, leprosy, and Chagas (CHAGAS?!) is ridiculous. These diseases are extremely difficult to spread, and the nation has them well under control. You should spend your time worrying more about Mad Cow and West Nile than these things.

The only thing I see here that’s worth worrying over is Hepatitis. Frankly, I think that Border states should require anyone working at a restaurant to show proof that they’ve had a Hepatatis A vaccination. (And more frankly, I think all states should require it).

Still, I think you’re more likely to get West Nile from a mosquito, as you are to get hepatitis at a restaurant. (Or unless you’re in the habit of handling the feces of immigrants from Asia and Latin America… anyone?)

If you’re worried, go get your shot.

Julia

OSI
Illegally entering a country is aggression. Handling them with kids gloves is not working.
They can either enter legally and become American citizens or they can risk their life and hopefully fail.
It is the ONLY way to stop this influx of criminals. And yes, everybody who enters this country illegally is a criminal.

Don’t worry. We will continue to ignore this major problem and it will continue to get worse.

Here is my parting shot. I equate handling border crossings with by jailing all of the illegal immigrants much like I do the war on drugs. Some people “at the top” think the way to combat drug use is to put all of the casual users in jail. Many of these people do have jobs and are productive members of society. Many illegal immigrants are honest people who either did not go through the proper channels or were denied for some reason.

Illegal immigration is a complex problem. We can all agree on that. Violence should never be part of the solution.

If we punish the companies who hire illegal immigrants to where its not worth them breaking the law again, we will make progress. But, remember that some of the companies (Walmart) support our political parties with lobbyist monies so the cycle is deeply imbedded in our social and political landscape.

Good topic, see you on another thread.

I guess my major problem is with illegals getting on the welfare dole, I mean if they are really coming to bust their butts (major misconception, believe me I use to work at a place that was 95% Mexican. It’s actually a racist generality of an entire ethnicity to say that they are better workers) than more power to them! I have worked hard my whole life and still can’t make ends meet because half of my paycheck goes to welfare programs (I am a single mother w/ ambition that keeps me off the dole). So somebody tell me this…if the issue is that life in Mexico is unfair than tell me…where am I to go!?!

Do those here advocating securing our southern border against illegal mexicans feel the same way about securing our northern border against illegal canadians?

I want to be clear that I think illegal immigration is a problem, but using the disease angle I think is a red herring (and a low blow). A lot of the influx of disease comes from Asian countries, and again, the people effected by it are the immigrants themselves, not us.

Julia

Traci
Very well said. But even if they do bust their butts as you say, they are still ILLEGAL.
Nothing like rewarding criminals and punishing those who abide by the law is there.

Jarin
Yes!

Yes. All illegal aliens.
What’s the difference which border it is?
All borders should be secured, and technology
can help do that much much cheaper than putting
troops and police along every foot of the border.

You don’t want someone illegaly entering your
home do you? Likewise, you shouldn’t want
someone illegaly entering your city, state, or country, regardless of border.

However, I do not advocate mistreatment or long term improsonment of illegal aliens;
just secure the borders.

However, we might make allowances for repeat offenders (we’ll know that, if we collect biometrics); then, put them in prison with some hard labor and work to do to pay their own expenses.

I actually think the big problem is being overlooked- Mexico needs a revolution- and allowing them to run away is not the solution- they need to stay and change their stars by overthrowing their government!! It wont be easy by any means but if they truly love their country they will come together and do it!!

So far Julia.
I don’t think that all of the people will stay along the border and they won’t leave their illnesses behind in their colonia.
Who’s to say that these diseases will stay under control? Most likely they will.
Calling attention to an issue is considered a ‘red herring (and a low blow)’.
There may be people who never even considered it.

Dawn,

Who’s to say that these diseases will stay under control? Me! I’ll say it! Only because you had the amazing resourcefullness to choose some of the least communicable diseases possible.

calling attention to a disease like Chagas (which is an insect born illness) is a red herring. Why even consider it? You’re children are not going to get Chagas even if they are having sex and kissing someone with the disease. So why bring it up? Same thing for tapeworm. Are you saying that these immigrants are going to throw up their tape worms into us?

The spread of a disease like TB, Malaria, Leprosy, MIGHT be spread to us from an immigrant. But it’s on the same level as saying our kids are going to get AIDS from sweat. It’s possible, but not very likely. These diseases are hard to transfer. The people who contract them, get them from long term exposure to a family member, or mosquitos. In order for me to contract leprosy, I would have to ingest fluids from their mouth or nose over a period of months.

The only valid disease here is Hepatatis A. (Not even any of the other Hepatatises). People have been infected with Hep A through bad food handling practices. That’s valid.

But it’s almost on the same level as you saying: “Dear God, illegal immigrants die much younger than us. Will I die young if I touch an illegal immigrant?” “Will I get cancer from this woman with breast cancer?” “Will I get Parkinson’s from this guy?”

If you’re going to pick on illegal immigrants for being dangerous, at least pick a disease that is easy to spread. Like… herpes.

But if you’re really worried about your child’s health, obesity is what you should concentrate on. And the care of chickens in China, who infect the world population with avian flu, which is going to kill a lot of us (again) someday.

Julia

And actually, leprosy isn’t BACK. it never left. In addition, the case count has gone down every year since we’ve been tracking it.

Those who responded to my initial question, thank you.

Of course, you realize I had another question waiting…

What exactly is the benefit of shutting out illegal immigrants from Canada? They don’t bear illnesses any more than people from the US do, they speak english so the spanish as a national language thing doesn’t apply, they’re not getting jobs as migrant workers or such that someone from a more third world nation might, and they’re hardly seeking to enter the country in significant numbers… what is the upside of punishing them for not having filled out the paperwork? None of the justifications that have been presented for mexican illegal immigrants would seem to apply to them, with the possible exception of the idea that having illegal status may make them more likely to commit other illegal acts to preserve their residency (which speaks more towards decriminalization than it does to increased enforcement). What is the rationale for making their entry to this country and continued residency illegal?

If anyone is wondering about the relevancy of these questions, I am trying to move the debate away from the cries of racism that it is degenerating into and speak more in terms of the immigration system and border policy itself, which seems easier to do with our northern border than it does with our southern one, for whatever reason.

You don’t want someone illegaly entering your home do you? Likewise, you shouldn’t want someone illegaly entering your city, state, or country, regardless of border.

That analogy seems flawed to me. A home is a private place. A country is not. It is more analogous to the city and state examples you cite. Yet cities and states are examples of entities with extremely porous borders. If security justifies tracking all those who cross borders and only allowing certain persons entry, why are there no examples of cities and states doing the same? It is only national borders that are being protected. But all of the same arguments could be made of these lesser borders. People from outside the city can come in and steal jobs, commit violence, spread disease. People from neighboring states could even commute to work across the border every day, stealing jobs and transporting who knows what communicable diseases and other pollutants back and forth. Why don’t we stop this from happening, if it is a real concern and not a red herring?

Jarin,

Thanks a lot! So what?

A home is a private place?
But, it’s a private place for a: CITIZEN !

The cities, states, and country are for: CITIZENS !

NOT illegal aliens.

OK. How’s this?
____________________________________________

… . _____I T_____I S_____I L L E G A L_____
____________________________________________

What part of “illegal” do you NOT understand ?

If it’s wrong, change the law.
But, trust me, the VAST majority want the borders secured.

Illegal aliens and the greedy corporations
that hire them are breaking the law.
Maybe we need to boycott some of these companies, which will immediately punish one of the guilty parties ?

Jarin,

Thanks a lot! So what?

A home is a private place?
But, it’s a private place for a: CITIZEN !

The cities, states, and country are for: CITIZENS !

NOT illegal aliens.

OK. How’s this?
____________________________________________

… . _____I T_____I S_____I L L E G A L_____
____________________________________________

What part of “illegal” do you NOT understand ?

If it’s wrong, change the law.
But, trust me, the VAST majority want the borders secured.

Illegal aliens and the greedy corporations
that hire them are breaking the law.
Maybe we need to boycott some of these companies ?

Simple

The constitution does not just apply to citizens, but to all residents of the country, except for things like voting.

One Simple Idea:

Yes, a home is a private place for a citizen. But if you extend that argument, why not make cities and states private places for their citizens and make it illegal for citizens of other areas to enter them without visas or choose to live there without government permission? Why not secure their borders against those who are not citizens of the same city and state? My point here is that maybe the law IS wrong. It’s been known to happen before. If security is the concern, why not make it harder to commit the crimes, rather than making living here without government permission itself a crime?

Sadly, the wealthy (who want cheap labor), and
the politicians (who don’t want to lose any votes),
and voters that are so lazy and apathetic to allow all of it,
are all responsible for this and many other problems.

The government is full of hypocrites and parasites, and
corporations, like Walmart, are full of
greedy, money grubbing elitist hypocrites.

Perhaps, Traci was on the right track…

Perhaps, what we need to resolve this and many other problems is “One Simple Idea” …

tctim,

OK…perhaps you’re right.
Start pickin’ em off where ever you see ‘em.

Just kidding.
OK…that was not very funny.

But, that should help demonstrate the anger this issue generates.

Jarin,
Are you saying no country should have the right
control their borders ?

Because if they don’t have that right, all illegal aliens, like a huge swarm of locusts, will descend upon us.

Is that what you want ?

Then, after everything is consumed and destroyed,
that huge locust swarm will move on to another
country. And, all countries around the planet
will be doing their utmost to prevent it. But,
some bleeding hearts will say “Oh dear…we
must let them make themselves at home and give
them everything we have”.

And when they have consumed everything, and nobody has anything (except poverty, chaos, and anarchy),
the bleeding hearts will be whining: “Gee wiz, I don’t get it, where did we
go wrong? We gave them an inch, but they took a mile.
They burdened our schools, hospitals,
welfare, and brought crime to our cities.
And this is the thanks we get. Well, if that don’t beat all.”

Do we, people of this nation, have the right to
control our own borders, just like you can
choose who does and doesn’t set foot in your home? Yes we do.

Jarin, please tell me. What law has been violated by enforcing border security?
Who’s rights were violated by simply arresting them and returning them to where they came from?
Who’s rights have precedence?
Your argument has no ground to stand on unless you
can prove that illegal aliens have a HUMAN right to illegaly enter the country.
So you’re saying illegal aliens have more
rights than citizens ?
By the way, I think it’s fair to ask this.
Are you an American citizen?

So, we need to start boycotting Walmart and
others violating the law. And, we need to
identify the politicians allowing this situation,
and vote them ALL out of office…

Yes, I am an American Citizen. Born and raised in New Jersey, currently living in Virginia. I have a social security number, a voter registration card, and a virginia driver’s license. I’m also not a minority, if that is your next question. All my relatives are citizens of this country.

Notably, I didn’t need government permission to move between New Jersey and Virginia when I moved here. Guess the citizens of virginia don’t care about noncitizens taking over their state… you can just choose to move here, get a drivers license, register to vote, and never need government permission for any of it. Nor even need to register with the government that you’ve come for a visit and let them control how long you can stay. A visit to any other state can easily and instantly turn to living there, on a mere whim, if you have someplace to stay or the means to procure lodging on a permanent basis. Again, if this is true of states, why is it not true on the larger scale of countries? You say that the citizens of this country have a right to control who enters it the same way a person has the right to defend his home from intruders, but what if the citizens of a state started exercising this “right” against those citizens of other states? What if the citizens of a city started exercising this “right” against those citizens of other cities? Clearly, this right doesn’t scale the way you suggest it does, which makes me question whether it is truly a right in the broad sense of citizens having the right to prevent people they don’t want from entering their nation’s borders.

If the future you envision, where illegal aliens act like a swarm of locusts on our country, is a credible threat then why is this not the case with the canadian border as well as the mexican border? It’s bigger and less defended than the Mexican border, but we’re not seeing waves of canadian illegals here burdening our system, etc etc. Is the issue actually purely that of illegal aliens, of whatever nationality, or is the issue those aliens classified as undesirables due to other factors such as poverty, education, health, or even (as others have suggested) ethnicity?

Actually, didn’t the Irish immigration increase the population by 10% a year? (The equiavalent of 25 million immigrants a year today)?

Is that right?

Jarin, actually border control with Canada is useful, and you see a lot of border control here in the Western States from the other states because of bug issues. There are agricultural checkpoints throughout the southwest. Border control with Canada is important, because A) Canada is more lax about its international arrivals, and so we have to re-verify visas and immunization shots. B) Animal diseases and bug issues that apply to our farms C) Anytime someone comes in to work, and isn’t documented we don’t get to tax them, and so you have to have a paperwork system to keep track of the Canadians, otherwise why would they pay American taxes? D) I think there are health insurance, and income provisions with Canadians, which is smart. E) It helps control the Canadian marijuana drug trade (maybe not a huge problem, but still)

Oh, and if you’re going to start arguing that we have a right to keep out those aliens which are undesirable (again for whatever reason), I really only have one response to that:

The New Colossus

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
“Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

These words are inscribed at the base of the Statue of Liberty on Ellis island, where once all immigrants to America passed through. Seems a pretty clear invitation to me, and a renewed affirmation that indeed, all men are created equal; and as such would be welcomed here. Why have we abandoned this principle?

Jarin, actually border control with Canada is useful, and you see a lot of border control here in the Western States from the other states because of bug issues. There are agricultural checkpoints throughout the southwest. Border control with Canada is important, because A) Canada is more lax about its international arrivals, and so we have to re-verify visas and immunization shots. B) Animal diseases and bug issues that apply to our farms C) Anytime someone comes in to work, and isn’t documented we don’t get to tax them, and so you have to have a paperwork system to keep track of the Canadians, otherwise why would they pay American taxes? D) I think there are health insurance, and income provisions with Canadians, which is smart. E) It helps control the Canadian marijuana drug trade (maybe not a huge problem, but still)

I don’t know anything about the agricultural checkpoints you describe between states in the midwest, so I’ll refrain from commenting on those for now. The furthest west I’ve been was either in Missouri or Minnesota… not sure which state I got further west in.

A) And yet they don’t really have any significant problems because of this. Could this indicate that perhaps laxness at borders is not the huge issue that some indicate?
B) Seems like it’s far more likely for birds or other animals to carry such pathogens across the border than for humans themselves to carry it. What are we doing to make our borders impermeable to these nonhuman carriers of disease/ecological contaminants?
C) And yet, people from other states can go to work in a neighboring state and pay taxes to that state without needing fierce border security or any special monitoring system… why can’t a similar system be used to make non-nationals pay their taxes as is used to make out-of-state workers pay state taxes?
D) I’m not sure of the relevance of this point. Clarify, please?
E) Debating this point would very quickly turn into a debate of the rationale behind criminalizing the action of certain citizens in putting particular substances into their own bodies. While an interesting discussion, it would detract from the larger debate about immigration, so I would ask we table it for the moment.

Jarin
I was going to let your rambling go on but there is one key word you need to understand—soverign. This nation is soverign. We are not part of a one world government, although close. Our laws are different than the laws of Mexico and Canada—thank GOD!! Now if everybody could go where they wanted to go without any criminal law being broken, then the next time you sit down to a piece of steak remember you are the USA not India, where it is a capital crime to kill a cow. The simple fact is that it is a federal crime to come into this country without documents that allow you to emigrate from and imigrate to. Legal imigration is worked out between two countries. Mexico and the USA have people emigrate from Mexico and imigrate to the USA using proper documents to achieve the purpose intended. That is how it is done.

Tom:

Laws can be changed. Even federal laws. And the lesson of history is that unjust laws should be opposed, even disregarded. “It’s the law” isn’t necessarily the end of the argument when deciding whether or not something that’s on the books should be enforced or removed.

Jarin,

No one is against immigration.
We let a lot of people immigrate to the U.S.
The U.S. is very generous. We also try to
provide asylum to those that are persecuted.

The inscription at the Statue of Liberty doesn’t
mean wide-open borders, and it never said let them sneak into the country, undocumented,
and, especially, all at once in huge numbers.
It’s symbolic. You’re twisting the facts.
So, that argument is lame.

We have a right to regulate the number of immigrants for obvious reasons.
Still, I’d like to hear your other reasons.

But, still, you didn’t answer the question?
Whose rights have precedence?
Is it a human right to move illegaly from country to country as you please, without permission?

I already said (above) ALL borders should be secured.
You’re trying to play the race/ethnicity card.

And, I didn’t ever ask you your race.
Again, you’re trying to play the race card.

By the way, all countries have border controls.
Sure it would be nice if we could all wander
about the planet freely, where ever we please.
But, it’s not a perfect world.
There are obvious security issues.
What about foreign criminals, terrorists, enemies of the U.S.?
Should we just let them all come here anytime
they please, settle in, invite a few friends?

And, yes…opening the borders wide open, with no border control, would be like a swarm of locusts. It is a very good characterization.
Because, afterward, there will be chaos and ruin.
And, everyone, now that things are screwed up for everyone, all starving and destitute, will be searching for the next country to plunder.

But, I tell ya’ what? Since you appear as though you don’t mind,
how about all those immigrants come live with you? At least as many will fit into your home?
It depends on the size of your home.
And they’ll be hungry when they get there.
So you’d better do some shoppin’ and fill up that refriderator. That’s very generous of you.
Too bad everyone else doesn’t have your generosity. Oh, what? You say you can’t do that?
Why not? You don’t have room? You can’t afford it? Right… That’s what I thought. It’s always someone else’s responsibility.

So, perhaps, your idea of no border control
sounds nice-and-fuzzy, until the real costs
start to impact you directly.

It’s not easy for everyone to endeavor to live at the expense of everyone else.

Jarin,

There are feirce protections in place when you travel to Hawaii (because of the fragile nature of the ecosystem). There are feirce systems in our ports. There are bug problems that cross borders due to the fact that the bugs imbed themself in shipping containers. They wouldn’t normally migrate into the heartland otherwise. There are safeguards in place across the nation to prevent bug infestation from one area to the other.

A) Verifying identity is done in all states. You have to have paperwork to drive a car here. In California, if you stay for more than a prescribed amount of time, you are required to register your car and get a new license.

B)see above

C) Having just dealt with moving from Florida to California, I can assure you that there are a lot of safeguards across states so that they can figure out if you ahve moved in state and you owe taxes. California has compliance with medical organizations so they can see if your primary doctor is here, thus making you a resident, thus making you taxable. Special monitoring sytems abound!

D) I think there are requirements to prove that you are financially able to take care of yourself in the first year, and you have health insurance, so you don’t use the emergency room for free. (States don’t require this, obviously)

E) We police trans-shipment of goods to make sure illegal goods don’t cross through the nation, and the border of Canada and Mexico offers us a convenient way to monitor the shipment of goods. (We’ll avoid marijuana, how about…. money laundering).

Jarin
You sound like a naive, wet behind the ears, liberal, one worlder. Your argument makes no sense and has more holes than all the golf courses in the world. I guess you would prefer anarchy. Allowing anybody to do what they want when they want and to anybody they please. I live in AZ where millions of illegal aliens have already come across the border. The law says they are criminals when they set foot into this land. You may not agree that the law is good and proper but it is the law and you can volunteer your time to tell it to the judge.

Yes. I believe it is spelled Sovereign.
__________________
DEFINITION
Sovereignty is the exclusive right to exercise supreme authority over
a geographic region, group of people, or one’s self.
Sovereignty over a nation is generally vested in a government or
other political agency, though there are cases where it is held by an individual…
__________________

But, still, a more serious issue is still one of human rights.
Who’s rights have precedence.
To me, citizen’s of a nation have the right to control their borders.
People of other nations have and expect the same.
Therefore, people of all countries have a duty to, first,
try to improve their own countries if they are dysfunctional,
or try to legally immigrate to another country, before imposing
on other countries. Canada, and Mexico, and most other
nations are not at war. They are not war zones.
This is not a matter of helping refugees of war.
These are people that are too apathetic and/or
unwilling to first, work and fight to improve
their own country. They would rather impose on
others, and would rather start at the top and work sideways. They would prefer to cut in line,
and cheat those that made the effort to immigrate legally.

And someday, when everything is perfect, and
no one breaks the law, and there’s no war, and
we all live in Utopia, then, immigration will no
longer be an issue, and we can all come and go
anywhere, anytime we please.

Julia
Spot on!! I can just see someone going before the judge after getting a ticket for not getting the car registration changed. The someone says to the judge—“Judge, I don’t think that law is just, proper, or good; in fact I think it is illegal against mankind”
JUDGE—“son pay the clerk your $500 on the way out”

I agree with Jarin. I’m from the UK. Well, actually, I’m half Italian, a quarter Irish and a quarter English. For many years now we have had open borders with our neighbours. You may say that this doesn’t matter because all the countries around us are rich, but this has not always been the case.

When Portugal, Greece and Ireland joined the union years ago, they were very poor and there were fears that we would be “swamped” by them. Ditto when Poland and other Eastern European countries joined last year.

It never happened. What has happened is that those countries have become far richer than they would otherwise have been, and we have become richer too.

In the case of the US, the US and the EU had open immigration policy towards Caribbean countries from 1950-1980. In that 30 year period, about 5% of the population left. This is not a net figure, it doesn’t include how many people went back. From 1960-1990, less than 1% of the 3rd world population moved to the developed world.

You guys are increasingly sticking your heads in the sand (understandably) after 9-11. But you will start to lose out. Free trade needs free movement of people. That is why the European free trade area benefits the people of the EU far more than NAFTA benefits the people of the US (despite the best efforts of the bureaucrats running the EU!).

Oh, and while I was looking around for info, I found this site, detailing lists of (legal) immigrants in all developed countries, which kept me amused for a while. Will the 3 people from Pitcairn in the whole of the UK please stand up.

Paul, you’re talking about legal immigration and guest workers. As far as I’m concerned, the more the merrier. My problem is with the illegal immigration.

AP, sorry, I was arguing against the theory raised by One Simple Idea (and to be fair, many other people) that a country would become “f