Immigration Policies Around the World

Note: For much of the information in this post, I relied on a useful guide to the citizenship laws around the world, compiled by the Office of Personnel Management -- it's worth a look.

As we wrap up the immigration debate, let's take a look at how other countries handle some of these issues.

On citizenship by virtue of birth:

Like the United States, France, India, Ireland, Mexico and New Zealand all automatically confer citizenship on anyone born within their territory, regardless of the citizenship of the child's parents. Canada has the same law, unless the parents are illegally present in the country.

Belgium, China, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, the Netherlands and Switzerland, among many others, do not recognize automatic citizenship by birth -- although exceptions may be made for orphans.

Somewhere between these two poles fall the policies of Australia, Austria and the United Kingdom. Citizenship is only conferred upon children born on those countries' territory if at least one of their parents is a citizen or permanent resident. In Austria, even if the father is an Austrian citizen, if the child is born out of wedlock and the mother is a foreigner, the kid's out of luck.

On building a wall:

Now and then, walls are built specifically to keep illegal immigrants at bay. Debater Derek notes the case of the Spanish enclaves of Ceutta and Melilla in northern Africa, bordering Morocco. Spain has struggled to keep African immigrants out of the enclaves, which serve as a launching pad into the European Union. Even India has built a barrier on parts of its border with its poorer neighbor, Bangladesh, to keep illegal economic migrants out.

On immigration as a wedge issue:

Hardly an original idea. Immigration has been a key issue in a number of recent European elections. Pim Fortuyn's Lijst Party in the Netherlands, Jorg Haider's Freedom Party in Austria, and French presidential candidate Jean-Marie Le Pen all ran on platforms opposing immigration -- even of the legal variety.

Is the United States headed in the same direction? Should a citizenship policy more like that of Great Britain or Italy be adopted here?

By Emily Messner |  March 31, 2006; 9:55 AM ET  | Category:  International
Previous: Born in the U.S.A. (Part II) | Next: This Week's Debate: Gasoline Prices

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Illegals should never demand or claim it's a right to be a US citizen. Only law obeying immigrants are welcomed.

The US can't take in the world and expect to continue to tbe the USA. It'll become a Balkanized state, with petty rivalries among ethnic groups that REFUSE to assimilate.

We don't need what happened in France here. And we don't need the BS interference of the Muslims in Holland (which one radical murdered a relative of that art master Vincent Van Gogh, right in the street and stuck his treatise with a knife in his chest!). >:(

If immigrants don't assimilate, if they break the law first then demand all the perks of citizenship without the work -- NO, we don't need them and they best pack up and go home.

End of story.

SandyK

Posted by: SandyK | March 31, 2006 10:08 AM

I think that the illegals are just that "illegal" why do Americans have to obey the laws and they don't? Also the workers are just slave labors for big business that's why the government doesn't want them sent back. Our country is up for grabs to the highest bidder. I have never felt so angry and disgusted.We need bright and honest people running our country.
disgusted American

Posted by: Norma | March 31, 2006 10:34 AM

SandyK, we're going to have that because of all the people that want the illegals to become citizens. We have a government that says one thing and does another. We need to vote these people out of office. Legal is legal and illegal is ??? If they would just enforce the law it would settle itself, but too many foreign lobbist are putting money in those deep pockets.
When the government fears the people, there is LIBERTY,
When the people fear the government, there is TYRANNY.

Posted by: Vic Bailey | March 31, 2006 10:35 AM

I'm for following Canada's lead. US citizenship by birth in the US if the parents are here legally.

Posted by: Sully | March 31, 2006 11:06 AM

Emily writes:
"Is the United States headed in the same direction? Should a citizenship policy more like that of Great Britain or Italy be adopted here?"

Maybe we should consider adopting the citizenship policy of the United States of America by enforcing the immigration laws. You can talk all you want about policy and walls but unless the laws are enforced no new policy or wall will matter. Lets say we adopt Britains policy. Will illegal immigration stop? Will our schools stop filling up with the children of the illegals? Will unskilled legal laborers not have to compete with illegal labor?

Come on, all that is really needed is real enforcement of hiring laws. Do that and the illegals will be without jobs and will head home. Their children born in the US are welcome to stay until we change the policy. All this talk about walls and changing policies is like firemen watching a house burn while they figure out how they could improve their fire truck.

The laws are in place. Enforce them. Nothing less will work. Laws work when acted upon. When they only sit on paper they do little but give people false security.

Posted by: | March 31, 2006 11:22 AM

OUR IMMIGRATION LAWS HAVE NOTHING TO RECCOMEND THEM. WHEN A BAD LAW IS USED AS AN EXCUSE TO BRAND SOMEONE AS ILLEGAL IT IS UNACCEPTABLE. WHILE LIVING UNDER A RULE OF LAW IS VITAL, THERE IS NOTHING THAT SAYS WE ARE OBLIGATED TO LIVE UNDER A RULE OF BAD LAW. WHEN WE WERE A BRITISH COLONY AND THE KING IMPOSED THE TEA TAX,A BAD LAW, HONEST CITIZENS CONDUCTED THE BOSTON TEA PARTY. A MAJOR EVENT LEADING TO THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION.

Posted by: DANA SARGENT | March 31, 2006 11:33 AM

Dana, you've made no argument as to why it is a bad law. Please explain.

Posted by: Freedom | March 31, 2006 11:37 AM

Emily- No one is running on a platform to oppose immigration. You continue to confuse LEGAL immigration with ILLEGAL immigration and endeavor to draw some comparison with those in our government who want to do something about our illegal immigrant problem with psuedo-fascists like France's Jean-Marie Le Pen. The issues of immigration in Europe (the immigrants were admitted legally and have failed to assimilate - that societ-within-a-society meme that I keep going back to) and that in America is decidedly different.

Posted by: D. | March 31, 2006 12:06 PM

I would be interested to know if there were any countries that did have totally open borders and/or no immigration policy whatsoever (no incoming or outgoing documentation process, no VISA process, no Immigrant or Legal Permanent Resident status, no citizenship process, etc.). If the answer is no, as I suspect it to be, why should the United States be any different?

More importantly, why should the United States edge more towards open borders seeing as how we are the most open country in the entire world regarding immigration?

Posted by: Will | March 31, 2006 12:49 PM

No title passes to a buyer in good faith (BIGF) if the goods are stolen.

Change "BIGF" to --baby of illegal immigrants-- and "goods" to --illegal immigrants-- and "title" to --citizenship" and there is the argument for not granting citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants.

Why should someone profit from their wrongdoing???

I know, W does it every day and the MSM lets him get away with it.

Just my opinion

Posted by: Richard Katz | March 31, 2006 12:51 PM

Ms. Sargent:

What you said is a bunch of crap. So, are you saying that a person who commits a crime shouldn't be called a criminal? Someone who lies shouldn't be called a liar? This is taking political correctness way too far.

By living in the United States we inter into a social contract, and agree to abide by the laws. If you commit a crime, you are a criminal. And, remember Zoe Baird--she lost a position under the Clinton administration for hiring an (pardon me) ILLEGAL alien in her home. It is a crime.

Posted by: Fed up! | March 31, 2006 12:58 PM

Let's assess Emily's performance as a moderator these past two weeks on the illegal immigration debate.

Last week, Emily kicked off the discussion with a warning about white Americans who formed what she called the "Paranoid Fringe of the Immigration Debate":

"So let's get the wacky fringe out of the way before we go any further. We can have a good laugh (or cry) about the fact that people really believe this stuff, and then we'll stick to arguments of merit for the rest of the week, rather than digressing into the absurd."

What are the "absurd," "wacky" things this "paranoid fringe" believes? That Latinos, once demographically dominant in the Southwest, will pass "anti-White legislation" (the scare quotes were Emily's), and "that there won't be "enough strong white people with spines left to win a CWII." (That's "Civil War II" -- which apparently will be the result of immigration -- for those not familiar with the lingo of the paranoid racist crowd.)"

"When extremists are involved," Emily warned, "one can never be too careful." She was talking about white extremists, natch.

Then, in comments, she wrote:

"So far, I have not come across anyone who advocates completely open borders because they think Latinos should rule the United States and put the smack down on all the white people."

Oh, Emily, to live in your sheltered world:

http://www.mexica-movement.org/granmarcha.htm

Some of the signs they carried in their millions-strong marches in American cities last weekend and through this week:

"THIS IS OUR CONTINENT, NOT YOURS!"

"We are indigenous, the ONLY owners of this continent!" (That's North America, Em).

"Stolen Continent" ("Continente Robado")

"White Racists Get Out, This Is Our Land!"

So Emily, once you've had your good "laugh (or cry)" about the "wacky," "paranoid," "racist", "absurd"people who "believe this stuff," you can explain to us why millions of Mexicans are marching through American cities carrying signs that say, you know, exactly what the "paranoid, racist crowd" has been saying they're saying.

Emily, again, you seem like a sweet young girl, but you've really added nothing but mediocre spin to this discussion. You don't understand the issues and you're too young and media-sheltered to have had any real-world experience; you know the world based on what your professors told you about it. So since you're so fresh out of school, maybe you'll understand a grade for your performance: D+.

Sorry, Em.

Posted by: DC Dude | March 31, 2006 01:14 PM

I have a degree in criminal justice & the biggest complaint I have with illegal immigration is the first act the illegal individual commits is a crime. If they are not willing to abide by our immigration laws what other laws are they going to break.
We would be better off sending the illegal immigrants home & have prisoners work for their keep.

Posted by: Lisa | March 31, 2006 01:14 PM

not really a comment on the immigration debate, but just thought i'd point out that Ceutta and Melilla border morocco, not algeria.

Posted by: oslet | March 31, 2006 01:21 PM

We have been a melting pot since the beginning and will continue. The major difference today many people come here illegally and think it is their right to be here. Unfortunately most do not want to asimilate. There is a constant cry to allow them their cultural identity at the expense of legal citizens. They are welcome to keep their heritage, in Mexico! Illegal aliens look at us as a stop off for money, money sent back home. They exhibit little interest in education and acquiring job skills. The immigrants that came to our shores in the past wanted to be citizens and made this their home. Not a suburb of Mexico!

Posted by: Lea | March 31, 2006 01:26 PM

Yeah, the Algeria thing had me LOL. And I'd also point out that it's "Ceuta," not "Ceutta". It's one of the Pillars of Hercules, Em. I guess you'll have to look that up, too.

Don't mean to keep harshing on Emily, but this is what you get when the moderator is learning the facts of the debate as the debate is taking place. It's been happening for the past two weeks.

Posted by: DC Dude | March 31, 2006 01:28 PM

The actual motivation for illegal immigration is the availability of employers who exploit these people with real low wages and make huge profits. As long as this happens, no walls can stop it. As people above suggested enforcing the current laws on employers will solve it. Once this is solved, I dont see a question of illegal children.

If no one hires an illegal, why would anyone want to enter the country and die of hunger?

Posted by: SK | March 31, 2006 01:33 PM

LET'S TRY TO LOVE ONE ANOTHER!!!!! What is the big deal anyway. I have family that depends on thsi new bill. I have children who depend on a new law so that Illegal can be here in the U.S. Legal! Try and put yourselves in someone else's shoes for once and quit being so selfish! Last I knew, the Bible says..."Jesus loves the little children, all the children of the world!" (For your info it does not say just U.S. citizens does it?)
! LOVE ONE ANOTHER !

Posted by: Heather | March 31, 2006 01:40 PM

Emily, I'm a DailyKos-type liberal, and even *I* don't like the idea of granting citizenship rights to kids born here to illegal immigrants. Canada has it right, as is so often the case.

I have to agree with many of the folks here who are saying that you're conflating legal immigration with illegal. The uproar these days is not over legal immigration, but the vast amounts of illegal immigration allowed over a porous southern border, and the negative economic impacts caused by the drain of resources, tax base, etc. by illegal immigrants weighing the social net down.

Also, I have to add that the pictures I've seen over the last few days of the "we didn't cross the border, the border crossed us" Take Back The Southwest crowd have really crushed what remaining sympathies I have.

People marching to demand citizenship grants for illegal immigrants, who toss aside the American flag for the Mexican flag? If that's where their loyalties lie, then they don't need to be asking for the gift of jobs, amnesty, citizenship from us.

It's obvious to me that the "fringe" ain't so fringey. The "We are indigenous" reconquista crowd's obviously looking to get citizenship so they can vote, and they try to secede the SouthWest to Mexico.

Not that I care that much about Texas, but the subversion idea they're fomenting sickens me.

Posted by: Taniwha | March 31, 2006 01:44 PM

Good God, have the Red Staters and Blue Staters found a common ground? Pinch me.

Posted by: D. | March 31, 2006 01:47 PM

"Cultural Assimilation"

or 'assimilation' for short (but that word also had other meanings), is an intense process of consistent integration whereby members of an ethno-cultural group, typically immigrants, or other minority groups, are "absorbed" into an established, generally larger community.

This presumes a loss of all or many characteristics which make the newcomers different. A region or society where assimilation is occurring is sometimes referred to as a "melting pot".

So when it is said that immigrants are failing to "assimilate" in american society
by critics exactly what are hey saying in terms of specifics?

Posted by: Cassini | March 31, 2006 01:54 PM

Heather cried:
"LET'S TRY TO LOVE ONE ANOTHER!!!!! What is the big deal anyway. I have family that depends on thsi new bill. I have children who depend on a new law so that Illegal can be here in the U.S. Legal! Try and put yourselves in someone else's shoes for once and quit being so selfish!"

The selfishness comes when someone crosses the border illegally. When that occurs it is no different that breaking into a store. The selfishness continues when a job is taken by the illegal immigrant which is no longer available for the American or legal immigrant. They have now selfishly stolen a job. They then get sick and show up at the local hospital which by law has to treat them, with no insurance. Me and other insurance carriers pay for their selfish use of American benefits. Their children are put into American schools at no cost to them but at a cost to Americans and their kids, who now have to be taught in portables. So Heather, who is being selfish?

The selfish one is the illegal immigrant. Why can't they obey the law, get in line to become legal BEFORE crossing the border and then there is no problem. I'm really tired of hearing how Americans are out of work but should not blame those hard working illegal immigrants.

Maybe Americans ought to just go down to Mexico and take the land, resources and make the 51st state. We need it more than them, come on, don't be so selfish.

Posted by: Sully | March 31, 2006 01:54 PM

D wrote:
"Good God, have the Red Staters and Blue Staters found a common ground? Pinch me."

Yup. Usually you and I are on opposite sides of most subjects. Funny how when your country is invaded the politics evaporates. Its right up there with what to do after 9/11.

Posted by: Sully | March 31, 2006 01:58 PM

the point is there are plenty of low-income people that used to be middle classed, craftsmen, factory workers, tradesmen that could use the work that illegals are taking


as well as real, bottom of the pile people that are having social services yanked away because _we_ can't afford them...


resent the illegals, I don't think so...


if the displaced middle-class, now poor, could understand why things were happening to them,

that they had been sold out by the corporations that they helped to build...


that their congress people and current administration were busy passing laws that would disenfranchise them...with NO GUILT,
or trepidation...

it's a good deal right, for the affluent.


and make them compete with Pakistani's where the "minimum wage" is 37 Cents an hour, which they _are_ willing to undercut to bring in US business...


there _would be_ a march on Washington complete with pitchforks, torches and probably some rope, and there would be a few less elected officials to blame for the current distortion called American democracy, which is actually a plutocracy......


hopefully, the people will figure it out soon, and some butts will be spanked.....

Posted by: the problem is... | March 31, 2006 01:58 PM

The United States acquired the northern half of what was then Mexico as a consequence of the Mexican-American war. This area later became the U.S. states of California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico and Utah. Now the Mexicans are trying to take it back by force of numbers. What's wrong with that?
God bless the San Patricios!

Posted by: ODunurta | March 31, 2006 01:59 PM

Cassini- When a large mass of immigrants demand that the existing society adapt itself to their presence, rather than they to it, is when you can say that they are not assimilating.

Posted by: D. | March 31, 2006 01:59 PM

Cassini-

If you are going to quote Wikipedia you owe it to the original author to quote them. Do not plagiarize here, please.

"So when it is said that immigrants are failing to "assimilate" in american society
by critics exactly what are hey saying in terms of specifics?"

The most prevalent would be failure to learn the national language.

Posted by: Will | March 31, 2006 02:01 PM

I think its heatening to see folks from both sides of the political divide in this country step up and recognize that this is a problem. Solutions may differ but the first step to solving the problem is acknowledging it.

Now, if only the politicos listen.

Posted by: D. | March 31, 2006 02:02 PM

WE have a group of people that work for us that

aren't working for us, they are on the public dole passing laws for themselves..


WE need a group of people passing laws that affect them too, that they are willing to abide by.....

enforcing the law against illegal hiring of illegal aliens should be easy....

those that have to compete against them, can pretty easily point out the violations,

perhaps we should have a bounty, for


_turning in_


those that hire illegals.


It's a lot easier to lock up a few hundred, violaters for a few months with a felony charge that radically alters their ability to bid on jobs or to vote or to not register with local law enforcement...


you wouldn't have to do it for very long...


keep the bounty in place for 5 years.


try it.

quit talking about the rightness or wrongness of it...


it's illegal.


speaking of illegals, where's the NM lobbyist for Mehico?

.

Posted by: ARREST THE HIRING AGENTS....including congress people... | March 31, 2006 02:02 PM

Ms. Messner's survey of how other country's do it is more than a bit manipulative. She totally ignores the key question of how many illegals are being taken in by these other countries -- a central issue since in America it is enough to drive the huge population growth we're experiencing and the chronic gridlock.

So Emily, how about it? Do any of the European countries take in 12 or 13 million illegal immigrants each year in addition to the million legal immigrants like we do?

Or how about this question: How disruptive is the immigration population? In Holland radical immigrants have killed those who pointed out that some Turkish immigrants are more likely to treat women as subservient. Those in government have had their lives threatened for bringing the issue up.

In Germany and Scandinavia, Turkish immigrant families have killed daughters that refused to live at home -- for "dishonoring" the family. People in these countries are raising an issue that deserves discussion -- what if an immigrant population holds beiefs towards women that are less tollarant than the culture they have moved to.

And when Ms. Messner looks at anti-immigration groups, naturally she only mentions groups that have bigoted agendas. She doesn't want to call everyone who opposes illegal immigration bigots, at least not directly, but that's the deeper agenda. Very sly.

Posted by: TimT | March 31, 2006 02:02 PM

ODunurta-

What Mexico y los Reconquistas y La Raza will find out, the hard way, is that if Mexico tries to force a state cecession over this issue, the United States will end it with a boot to the face and will "annex" some land for its troubles.

Posted by: Will | March 31, 2006 02:04 PM

"The United States acquired the northern half of what was then Mexico as a consequence of the Mexican-American war. This area later became the U.S. states of California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico and Utah. Now the Mexicans are trying to take it back by force of numbers. What's wrong with that?"

Perhaps the fact that Mexico isn't at war with us, that the issue was settled with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo 100 years ago?

Besides, if someone's attempting to take what Americans built in those states "by force", whether numbers or not, then what's wrong with that is that it's an invasion, and that America has the right to fight back with what means it deems necessary.

If they're just wanting to take it back, why the lie about wanting to be American citizens? Doesn't that just prove that they're invaders who lie to damage America?

What's funny is the idea that, rather than fix the nation they have, a people would rather just steal what someone else built on land they claim was once theirs.

Do they think that if they were to annex LA it would somehow remain the affluent American economy they want to leech off?

Also, do they really think that they can vote to secede without a neat little civil war? Do they think they could win that?

Posted by: Taniwha | March 31, 2006 02:06 PM

you're so smart that you can't speak for yourself,

or do more than parrot, "cassini"...

for whom the bell tolls...

there's a distance in your "acting" that comes through in your posting...


you can't really relate, you need to remove some of the filter of

your "self"

life experiences, what do you think meditation _is_ about


reveal yourself, quit _trying_ to be right


be visible..

.

Posted by: well, that's a shock... | March 31, 2006 02:06 PM

"Can't we All Just Get Along"
God, Please blessed this great nation of ours and those that seek a better life by Heading North.

Posted by: Smith | March 31, 2006 02:07 PM

Also, here's a funny for ya:

A group of people who claim they were "indigenous" to this nation, but ... gee, isn't Spanish from Spain? Are they claiming to be, what... 100% Incan?

Posted by: Taniwha | March 31, 2006 02:09 PM

Last I knew, the Bible says..."Jesus loves the little children, all the children of the world!" (For your info it does not say just U.S. citizens does it?)

Screw the Bible, screw the koran and any other religious text. The Bible has no bearing on these laws. Are you for real?

By the way, I hope the people protesting in CA are being photographed or filmed, and that they are rounded up and kicked out of our country, pronto! I'd let the others stay, but not let anyone else in, for a few years.

Posted by: johnnyg in NE DC | March 31, 2006 02:09 PM

OK, this immigration debate is getting completely out of control. If you give amnesty to these illegals here's what will happen; they will become eligible for minimum wage jobs making them more competitive further pushing out the American worker.

I'm getting sick of seeing illegal immigrants, no matter what nationality they are, protesting on the streets with their flags in the air. If you have such great pride in your country then why did you leave and decide to violate our laws when entering this country. You are not a legal citizen or resident and therefore your voice should not be heard under our 1st ammendment protection. You are a criminal if you are here illegally, simple fact.

Along with establishing your disrespect towards the laws of America you in addition disrespect the tax payers of America who have to pay for your criminal activity by providing schooling and healthcare when you skip school and work to protest your supposed rights.

You wave your national flags in the streets yet you decide to make Americans pay and remedy your ills. Salvation lies within. It's a shame that you cannot petition your own government for change. Instead you invoke your national pride which you abandoned in your criminal migration to the US and demand justice.

However, all those feelings mentioned above can be changed if a little respect for national sovereignty came into play and legal immigration was the mode of immigration. It's quid pro quo. If you want and demand respect then you should show some as well towards a country that can give you a better life.

Posted by: BigB | March 31, 2006 02:11 PM

it has to do with _not wanting to be American_


just wanting American dollars...


not speaking the language, not spending their money here, bringing in their family and having relations with them...


not _assimilating_


you could make the same case for some jews, in all of their countries

but courage requires that you look at that as a fact

jewishness, is a lot closer to ethnicity than a religion...they enforce marrying within the faith for the orthodox...

not to digress, but I figure we'll see if people have courage or not...
.

Posted by: gomer

Posted by: not assimilating... | March 31, 2006 02:12 PM

Some of the comments I've read regarding the nomenclature of illegal immigration strikes me as over-representing the apologists for criminal entry into this country, so I propose to nudge the nomenclature discussion toward a more honest balance.

On one side, we have the term "illegal alien", which, though deemed offensive by some, is, to my knowledge, legally accurate and factual. This is generally the most negative term I see in discussion of this bahavior, yet its connotation is no worse than neutral.

In common usage, and widely viewed as a middle groundm is the expression "illegal immigrant", which is a term that's internally inconsistent. How can a person be an "immigrant" when immigration is a process by which persons lawfully take up residence in a land other than that of their citizenship. This term is, therefore, a null concept, and absurd. It is, essentially, a term invented to soften the presentation of unlawful entry into the US, and an example of political correctness taken to the point of nonsense.

At the apologist end of the linguistic span are those who claim that the only acceptable term for this class of person is "undocumented worker." This is a term that implicitly denies that there's anything wrong with entering the country unlawfully, and that such persons are somehow being cheated out of documentation of a status which is their right.

There is no common usage of any language that would counterbalance the extreme and subversive expression "undocumented worker," and this has the effect of distorting the language of the entire debate. The scope of the language used includes only a range from the neutral, factual, mildly negative "illegal alien" to "undocumented worker," with its extremely potent connotation that it describes a virtuous person who is being wronged by what one debater refers to in upper case as "bad law."

This does not make for an honest and balanced debate. The debate needs a different word, one that honestly describes the behavior of these persons for what it is, however the word and its connotation may offend those who criminally enter this country, and their supporters.

The term to be added to the debate should be chosen carefully and well. It should be factually accurate. It should represent an attitude and a position opposing, offsetting, and balancing its extreme opposite, "undocumented worker." It should reflect the circumstances surrounding this unlawful behavior, such as the fact that the government of these persons' country of origin aids, abets, endorses, and even sponsors this unlawful behavior. It should be part of the common language, so that it would be readily understood by all who hear or read it.

There is such a word available for our use. It is a direct, honest, even stark word, and one that accurately describes the behavior of a person who crosses the border of a foreign country without permission or right, and with the encouragement, aid, and support of that person's home government. Some would consider it a very harsh word.

It is a word that could serve to counter the connotation of "undocumented worker," one that, rather than implying that unlawful entry into this country is a right, and US sovereignty an injustice, connotes the sovereign right of the US to control its borders, and that violation of that border constitutes an offense; that unlawful entry into this country is itself unjust.

It should not be the only word accepted into the language of this debate, but, as long as one extreme side of the conversation insists on the apologetic term "undocumented worker," should remain within the debate's vocabulary.

The word I'm thinking of is "invader."

Posted by: Ken | March 31, 2006 02:12 PM

The United States acquired the northern half of what was then Mexico as a consequence of the Mexican-American war. This area later became the U.S. states of California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico and Utah. Now the Mexicans are trying to take it back by force of numbers. What's wrong with that?
God bless the San Patricios!

F*** you. If it's war you want, you will get it, and we will crush your fkn asses.

Posted by: | March 31, 2006 02:15 PM

As long as those individuals that wish to live in this country continue to demonstrate waving Mexican flags, I believe that we should be wise to question the "real" motives for their influx unless of course that is a sign of American patriotism in the border states.

Posted by: camus | March 31, 2006 02:15 PM

You think that maybe, just maybe, all of their protesting probably did them more harm than good?

Posted by: | March 31, 2006 02:16 PM

Yeah, let's fkn take more of their land, kick them off of it, and build a wall.

Posted by: | March 31, 2006 02:19 PM

Will:

yes, that definition came from wikepedia and no i wasn't taking credit for it. lol

It's just that I keep hearing that phrase
from immigration critics about their being a "failure to assimilate" to american society.

So, the critics are saying to the immigrants:

"You're in our country now, so therefore it is imperative, that you act and talk like us. That means that whatever culture you came from no longer exist because you are now a american."

If that is so, then who is setting the standards for "assimilation" in to american society by immigrants?

Posted by: Cassini | March 31, 2006 02:19 PM

.... at our new border

Posted by: | March 31, 2006 02:20 PM

WOW

Posted by: | March 31, 2006 02:24 PM

Forget England and Canada.

I believe that we should follow the policy of Israel regarding immigration, a "democracy" with a highly religious and ethnic selection process.

I also would note that if Palestinian workers were to demonstrate in the streets of Tel Aviv with Hamas flags, it is unlikely they would get amnesty or citizenship which they are precluded to get currently.

Would that be called xenophobia by the Media pundits or a national security necessity?

Posted by: camus | March 31, 2006 02:26 PM

Cassini, you speak only in extremes. Critics are not saying you must renounce your culture completely. Have your culture, and live it, so long as it can coexist within American culture without disrupting life. If you can't speak the nations language, thats a problem. If you don't think you need documentation to work, thats a problem. If you don't think you need to pay taxes, thats a problem. Driving without a license? Problem. BREAKING THE LAW by being here illegally? Thats a problem.

You try to push an agenda through emotion, but these emotions you are trying to illicit with your statements are baseless. If you want to live here, with our people, our people should not have to change their way of life to accomodate yours. They are not making the choice to move here. You are.

Posted by: Freedom | March 31, 2006 02:26 PM

maintaining your

superiority,

which is an illusion.

if there the reason to be here, is _the MONEY_


then, immigrating isn't the issue.


any more than working in Riyadh, they just want to be here, illegally or legally as long as they get the money...


it's not some deep _I want to be American_


longing.


but, frankly you're ignoring the big picture,

which is that illegals are negatively affecting the life of the citizens and _they_ don't care...


WE know, that you have the finances to look down from your lofty height and say, why not hire a few gardeners and I even know a couple that own a restaurant that are illegals.......


it's called "importing third world conditions to the United States,"


and illegals are only _part_ of the problem...


they are a part that needs to be addressed...


I hate pissants that try and win arguments by discussing one that only they are having internally with their parents.

.

Posted by: you're an arrogant distorter of what is being said as a way of | March 31, 2006 02:27 PM

are ignoring and not talking about something


_very_ _important_

_you_


_don't care_

about the citizens or how you're affecting the economy...

and yet, little Arlingtonians...


_you_ want us to care,


I realize that you're young, but hey

I do care, I care enough that I want to arrest your parents employers, and deport them...get it?

.

Posted by: look, you little illegal alien... | March 31, 2006 02:33 PM

Those who come to visit a foreign land, to do business there, who come to join that society, to immigrate, who come in peace, accept their own status as invited guests, and behave accordingly.

They are not asked to abandon their native culture, but they are expected to accept that the culture of the place to which they've come as what it is, to acknowledge that culture's right to continue, and the necessity that they deal with the host culture as it is. "When in Rome, do as the Romans do."

Those who come expecting to bring their own language and culture into a new land intact, to displace and supplant the culture of the host society with their native culture, and to take what they want from a new land without regard for the values and culture of the host society, do not come in peace. They come to take, to conquer, to destroy. Whether they enter lawfully or unlawfully, such persons are not visitors, not immigrants, and not peaceful. By their attitudes and behavior, they define themselves as invaders.

US citizens who visit Mexico either learn, speak, read, and write Spanish. or else they struggle, and are viewed as inept and disrespectful of their hosts. This is right and appropriate.

How should foreigners who come to the US, expecting to speak no English, disregard the host culture, and claim status equal or superior to that of the host culture be viewed any differently than "ugly Americans" in Mexico?

Posted by: Ken | March 31, 2006 02:35 PM

Falls Church, Arlington, Baileys Crossroads...


we need to do a sweep...


pick up these kids and see if their parents are illegals...


ha ha ha....


we'll be seeing you this afternoon...

.

Posted by: that's humerous... | March 31, 2006 02:36 PM

Freedom:

Youre wrong, I'm just asking people that oppose immigration to explain their terminology, it has nothing to do with emotion.

So youre saying complying with the law and learning the language are "assimilation".

I believe it goes a bit deeper than that, but that is a whole different topic.

Posted by: Cassini | March 31, 2006 02:38 PM

It's so not right to clasify someone based on the fact of having or not a social security number. America is the land of opportinuties... I sure know that lots of people have crossed the border but those people who have been working for years and years should have the right to stay.

There are so many american junkies meth-addicts that are making no contributions whatsoever to the economy and now they want about 11 million hard working immigrants to leave the country just like that and start over just because they didn't have legal means to get here? have you taken a look at the requisits to come here with a working visa?
You have to be real... they're not gonna go anywhere until we finally legalize them and finally secure the border in an efficient way... only then we can start controlling immigration

Posted by: Frank | March 31, 2006 02:40 PM

look below

do you understand that when expansion doesn't work anymore...


because their is nowhere to expand to that you need to start thinking in alternative ways?


at some point you actually start managing your planet as if you didn't mean


to destory it by not thinking ahead.


we as_humans are beginning to saturate the planets capacity to absorb our pollution, population and thoughtlessness.


what you consider compassionate, is thoughtless....

at some point you begin looking at the ecology of the situation...


human, land, business

it's a system, not a right...


you can't keep a village clean by screaming at it...you have to have water, sewage......


and capacity, we can't even handle our own citizens needs...


do the illegals care, apparently not...
.

Posted by: why _population control_ is important... | March 31, 2006 02:41 PM

Well I have not heard the arguement that "this used to be our land." In an attempt to pre-empt that claim all I have to say is "Remember the Alamo." You should remember what happened to the Mexican commander after he attacked the Alamo to try and take back what was once their's, and that goes for the British as well. If you make that claim you should be very, very aware that history repeats itself and we all know what has happened when people try to come back the United States and re-claim territory.

However, the Native Americans got a bum wrap over their takeover. I think Custer was the fall guy for that whole thing.

Posted by: SouthernDem | March 31, 2006 02:41 PM

Ken:

Paragraph#3 of your post above.

Do you believe that invading the U.S.is what the hispanic immigrants are doing?

Posted by: Cassini | March 31, 2006 02:43 PM

her friends to like her...

she's trying to please people..


not be a journalist, 'course she doesn't have the experience or direct knowledge either...


why else would she call blue-collar middle class jobless

whiners?


stupidity, ignorance.

.

Posted by: she's not sly, she's young and wants | March 31, 2006 02:44 PM

Frank speculates:
"It's so not right to clasify someone based on the fact of having or not a social security number. America is the land of opportinuties... I sure know that lots of people have crossed the border but those people who have been working for years and years should have the right to stay."

So if I go to Mexico and refuse to leave all I have to do is hide and wait (how many years?) before I can become a citizen? Is that how immigration works in Mexico? You are doing nothing but arguing for squatters rights. Sorry, this is America and there are no aquatters rights for legality or citizenship here. Do they exist in Mehico?

To control illegal immigration we must control the hiring of illegals. Its the reason they come. Take away the reason and they will stop coming. Make being here a felony and those who are here, without jobs, will get home on their own. No deportations necessary. They can even keep the money they've made illegally here. Not bad deal for a bunch of criminals.

Posted by: Sully | March 31, 2006 02:49 PM

Hey Sully,
your poor attitude makes me just refrain from even discussing this topic with people like you who think are entitled to call immigrants (who take care of your kids, wash the dishes where you eat at the restaurants, work at the Deli or grecery store, and pick up your vegetables and fruits) criminals!

Criminals are the ones in jail who according to a republican senator of CA... should be sent to the fields to collect veggies instead of the undocumented immigrants

Posted by: Sully | March 31, 2006 02:59 PM

I read that Canadians made up of about 20 thousand illegals crossing over, but I think half of them were drunk on Crown Royal or Labbatts Blue, they just wanted to try and see if they could walk a straight line, and figured they'd try to do it on the boarder line, they accidentally staggered over to the US side...so....not really their fault. Just need to stand near and nudge them back accross the Canadian line.

Posted by: Stan | March 31, 2006 03:01 PM

Then what do you call someone who illegally crosses the border into America and takes a job by lying and providing false social security and other information? Saints?

Posted by: Sully | March 31, 2006 03:03 PM

Sometimes when you're near the Canadian / US boarder, you can hear "I'm illegal, no I'm not" "I'm illegal... no I'm not" It's kind of slurred speech, but you can hear it.

Posted by: Stan | March 31, 2006 03:07 PM

Someone using my name wrote:
"your poor attitude makes me just refrain from even discussing this topic with people like you who think are entitled to call immigrants (who take care of your kids, wash the dishes where you eat at the restaurants, work at the Deli or grecery store, and pick up your vegetables and fruits) criminals!"

First off, they have committed crimes by coming here. They continue to commit the crime by staying here. They commit a crime when they provide false employment info. Their employers are committing crimes if they know the person they are hiring is illegal. They are criminals. They're not called "illegal" for nothing. And please don't cry the crocidile tears that they are doing me and America a favor by working here. The studies show they are taking unskilled jobs from honest workers and have driven the unskilled jobless rate here to 10%.

Posted by: Sully | March 31, 2006 03:10 PM

Most of them (because is bad to generalize) are people who are despearte to function in a country that is fair and has a good economy system overall... it's not thier fault that the systems in their countries don't work. I have a friend who is undocumented and hasn't been able to see her mother and entire family in 6 years, do you think one day she woke up and said hey! why don't i get into the USA just for the heck of it and just so I can't see my family at all in years??? I don't think so...

I don't know where you are from but I live in NYC where immigrants are almost all of us... and without them New York could turn into let's say Idaho... in a second...
now does that sound like fun for our economy?

Posted by: Frank | March 31, 2006 03:11 PM

Ok Sully I have to go to work now. You seem to have lots of time on your hands so keep debating by yourself while I go to work and be productive ... stay on the internet good luck...

Posted by: Frank | March 31, 2006 03:13 PM

and primarily the discussion is about mexican illegals...


.

.

.

Posted by: Hey Frank, you seem like a nice guy... | March 31, 2006 03:17 PM

Frank-

"it's not thier fault that the systems in their countries don't work."

If not their's, whose fault is it? Ours?

"I have a friend who is undocumented and hasn't been able to see her mother and entire family in 6 years, do you think one day she woke up and said hey! why don't i get into the USA just for the heck of it and just so I can't see my family at all in years??? I don't think so..."

Your friend isn't undocumented, your friend is a criminal, is illegally trespassing, and is an unlawful invader. And he/she doesn't treat their mother right.

Posted by: Will | March 31, 2006 03:18 PM

Frank wrote:
"I don't know where you are from but I live in NYC where immigrants are almost all of us... and without them New York could turn into let's say Idaho... in a second... now does that sound like fun for our economy?"

Sounds like a threat! I'm from DC and there are a lot of immigrants here, legal and illegal. I ask any company I hire for yard work or painting whether their workers are all legal. They may lie, but the questioning of companies has to start somewhere. I don't have a nanny but a neighbor does. The nanny is here on a student visa and the family is sponsoring her. That makes her legal. Its people like me and my neighbor that make jobs for legal immigrants possible because we refuse to use illegal immigrants.

And I really do not care that they are leaving poverty for a better life. America has always opened its doors to those seeking a better life. I just get upset when some people do not want to stand in the immigration line and feel they can butt in front of everyone else, lie about their documentation and then say they have some sort of right to be here.

As for NYC, it was doing quite well before illegals decended upon it. It will do well once they are all gone as well. In fact, probably better. Wages for unskilled labor will go up once the illegals are gone. Jobs unavailable will be available to the legal unskilled labor force in the NYC area that is currently suffering under the weight of the illegal labor. No Frank, I'm not worried about NYC's or DC's illegal immigrants leaving, in fact, I look forward to it.

Posted by: Sully | March 31, 2006 03:21 PM

paragraph #3 above,


the kid from Arlington said that didn't he...


they're invading and reclaiming, what the spanish lost in a war...


not the Mexicans, the Mexicans aren't spanish any more....tell them that...


hey Arlington babies, just kiddin..I not with the INS...don't worry, just get smart

lazy burritos..

.
.
.

.

Posted by: cassini... | March 31, 2006 03:23 PM

D wrote:
"Good God, have the Red Staters and Blue Staters found a common ground? Pinch me."

D-
I was watching Newt Gingrich on Faux News last night and found myself nodding my head, agreeing with him. Then the room spun and I put my head between my legs. When did the devil incarnate start making so much sense?

Posted by: wiccan | March 31, 2006 03:25 PM

A suggestion for all you anti-illegal immigration types.

GET OVER IT!!and face the music.

President Bush is NOT going to deport
11 million illegal immigrants.

A law to punish those that hire them is NOT going to happen.

The 11 million illegal immigrants here are NOT going to voluntarily leave the country.

A 700 mile wall along the border is NOT
going to be built.

So instead of banging your heads up against a wall, why dont you think of positive ways of helping them to "assimilate" legally into the U.S.?

Posted by: Cassini | March 31, 2006 03:28 PM

Cassini-

I will politely disagree with you in the ballot box.

Posted by: Will | March 31, 2006 03:31 PM

Thanks Cassini
You're totally right
here's also what NYC Major Bloomberg had to say about it...

" We're not going to deport 12 million people, so let's stop this fiction," the mayor said in an interview taped on Monday and telecast last evening on CNN. "Let's give them permanent status."

The mayor expressed a similar view on Monday morning, during a news conference on Staten Island, when he said large-scale deportations were impossible and added: "We've got to figure out what to do, whether we can engage them and get the value of them being here. They're already here. They do a lot of jobs that a lot of other people don't seem to want to take." "

Posted by: Mark | March 31, 2006 03:40 PM

and a member of the affluent that


wants to give


_your_


job to his little dark skinned brother...


because he's a lobbyist too....


using his box office appeal to sway your congress...


dishonesty looks normal on you punk.

.

Posted by: hey, the great cassini _is_ a whiner... | March 31, 2006 03:40 PM

Cassini,
Bush just keeps digging the hole deeper and his fellow reps are scrambling away. The writing is on the wall, the status quo will not do. Many thought Dubai Ports would win in the end too. The American people are speaking and this weeks protests show the illegal community is worried. This November illegal immigration will be a major issue and those wanting to coddle the illegals will be voted out. The wind is changing for illegals. The free ride is over.

And its not like they cannot go back to their countries and get in line behind all the others obeying the law and going through the immigration process. They do not have to stay here and remain criminals. They need to understand they are in this country illegally and will be punished when caught instead of thinking they have some sort of right to be here.

Posted by: Sully | March 31, 2006 03:41 PM

Mark,
When is Bloomberg up for re-election?

Posted by: Sully | March 31, 2006 03:43 PM

Whats wrong with Idaho?

Posted by: | March 31, 2006 03:44 PM

"So instead of banging your heads up against a wall, why dont you think of positive ways of helping them to "assimilate" legally into the U.S.? "?

They haven't shown any interest in assimilation, what with the "reconquista" marching and flapping the Mexican flag and big posters claiming that they were here first and the borders moved, not them.... funny, I don't think any of them look old enough to have lived here when it was Mexico.

Irridentism must be ended. Simple as that.

Posted by: Taniwha | March 31, 2006 03:46 PM

Sully-

"And its not like they cannot go back to their countries and get in line behind all the others obeying the law and going through the immigration process."

Wrong. They had one chance to enter this country legally and they blew it. The United States can and does reserve the right to prevent legal immigration access for prior unlawful entry or attempted unlawful entry. The American Dream will be reserved for those understand American Law, first and foremost.

Posted by: Will | March 31, 2006 03:51 PM

Sully:

I understand and respect your opinion, however I disagree with you.

I'm just being totally realistic. Think about it. None of the things that you
are proposing in regards to "illegal immigrates" are going to happen. they are here and they are here to stay.

So the best thing to do imho is to offer them amnesty, get them legal and into the system and hopefully they will lead
productive lives in their new country, as many of them already are.

Posted by: Cassini | March 31, 2006 03:53 PM

Many people forget who were the first (BOAT) illigals in this country and that they themselves are descendants of such people they seek to keep out.

Posted by: MZUNYE | March 31, 2006 03:55 PM

Answer to Will
The only country that I can think of that had totally open borders and no immigration policy whatsoever was this one now known as America. So you would have to ask the Native Americans if they would have changed their immigration policy. lol

Posted by: Jim | March 31, 2006 03:57 PM

Taniwha:

Didnt Sadaam Hussien say something similar about Iraq/Iran? Was that not at one time
one country that was colonized and divided by the British?

Posted by: Cassini | March 31, 2006 03:59 PM

Your former DEMOCRATIC congressman from New Mexico, defeated last election turned lobbyist for Mexico...


what's he saying?


"But as you've said the law is the law is the law, except for when it is changed and it is the law anymore. So don't get upset if Congress and the president change the law, that is the right of the political branches. We all gotta lobby about what we believe in right? I happen to believe very strongly in this or I wouldn't be wasting my time talking about it so darn much."

Posted by: El Naco | Mar 30, 2006 4:47:58 PM

topic for discussion was:


Immigrants' Attitudes on Immigration


apparently _he_ and Cassini, have cut a deal with your president and his backers...


all they have to do is maes it through congress....


whether you want it or not, and he is a citizen right?


since the 1600's his families been here, does that make him spanish or American?

.


who does he care for?


what does El Naco stand for?

in spanish it means an indigenous that has a lot of money and acts like an intolerable, it's all about the money kinda person...


and cassini's backing him...

.

Posted by: and El Nachoe... | March 31, 2006 04:01 PM

Cassini-

If the reason they are here disappears, the invaders (Ken is right) will leave. Please don't tell me they are just yearning to breathe free. There's seven months til the election. Time to put the heat on Congress to severly penalize employers for hiring them. The ruling elite forgot that Bush couldn't take away our right to vote, unless something freaky happens before the elections and he tries to suspend them. Then we just have another revolution.

Posted by: wiccan | March 31, 2006 04:02 PM

Will,
Only if they are caught. Those who are still unknown to the immigration services can head home, with their ill-gotten-gain and get in line.

Cassini,
All we need to do is enforce the laws on hiring illegals. I remember as a kid watching INS agent swarm into a restaurant and arrest many illegals. I saw this more than once. When I was 16 in the 1960s I worked as a busboy. There were many immigrants but none were illegal. The INS agents showed up regularly. If you wanted to stay in business you did not hire illegals.

If we got back to that level of enforcement many ilegals would be out of a job and have no choice but to head home. And today the laws include punishing the employers. The incentive to only hire those legally entitled to work in America would be even higher than in the past when no consequences existed for the employers. We only need to enforce the laws. Its that simple and not has daunting as you make it out to be.

Posted by: Sully | March 31, 2006 04:04 PM

and El Nachoe:

You must enjoy banging your head up against the wall...lmao

isnt that not painful?

good night you guys and have a great weekend..its Miller Time..lol

Posted by: Cassini | March 31, 2006 04:05 PM

looks like we may defeat this mccarthyism...

how's it feel cassini..


everyone thinks you're so sweet and kind...


you're a parasite...

.

Posted by: hey sweetheart... | March 31, 2006 04:05 PM

Cassini,
I'm just curious, but please explain how this: "So the best thing to do imho is to offer them amnesty, get them legal and into the system and hopefully they will lead productive lives in their new country, as many of them already are" is good for the nation and the illegal immigrants?

Why do you think they will still have jobs when they are legal, registered, and required to follow the employment laws they currently disregard? Or deal with the current mishief they cause with fake SSN numbers that cause havoc for the people they took them from when they have to deal with someone else's debt and loans? When illegals become legal enmasse, huge problems will occur because they will have lost their allure to employers.

Posted by: Freedom | March 31, 2006 04:07 PM

Cassini wrote:
"good night you guys and have a great weekend..its Miller Time..."

Good night Cassini, I'll be drinking Dos Equis tonight...

Posted by: Sully | March 31, 2006 04:07 PM

it always hurt s when I put it

in

deep...


feel it?

Posted by: yeah sweetheart... | March 31, 2006 04:08 PM

Sully:

The big gquestion that is running thru my mind is why havent they been enforcing the laws up to now?

I mean really..how in the hell do 12 MILLION people get into the country illegally unless SOMEBODY was asleep at the wheel.

enforcing the law may limit future illegals from entering but I really think its unrealistic to think that President Bush and the Republican congress are going to deport 12 MILLION people. It's just not going to happen.

Posted by: Cassini | March 31, 2006 04:09 PM

I'm afraid I'm not an expert on Saddam Hussein's speeches. Did he at once say that he felt that Iraq and Iran should be merged? Got me.

Also, if I recall, the Iran/Iraq border was redrawn by British colonization.

The Mexican/American border was drawn up by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848. A treaty between Mexico and America, not a third party like Britain.

At that time, Mexico legally ceded a great portion of land, and we made the Gadsden Purchase. We paid Mexico $15 million, and took on something like $3.5 million in Mexican debt.

But as long as you're pissing about 150+ year old border wars, would you like to revisit the 54/40 border war with Canada?

Posted by: Taniwha | March 31, 2006 04:10 PM

make it a felony to hire them...

can you read?

or just want to make a mythology?

how's Roman?

.

Posted by: why bother... | March 31, 2006 04:11 PM

make it a felony to hire them...

can you read?

or just want to make a mythology?

how's Roman?

.

Posted by: why bother... | March 31, 2006 04:13 PM

These people are criminals....period. While others took the LEGAL route to immigrate to this country, this group has CHOSEN as their first act to become CRIMINALS and ignore the LAWS of the U.S. Explain to me why I should have sympathy for them? Because their own country is Third World...including our immediate neighbor to the south? Because they want to build a better life for their children? Because they've managed to avoid capture and forceable return to their country of origin for such a long time they now have children born and raised here? TOUGH! The facts of life are that there always have been and always will be countries and peoples better off than others. Should we work to help lift them up economically? Should we protest undemocractic rule and work towards a kinder-gentler government for them? Should we sympathize and help their sick and educate their children? Yes, we and they should do all these things...IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY! Illegally entering this country, taking advantage of the benefits of living and working here, and then refusing to abide by our laws and demanding better treatment than a common street thug? This is why there is a burning disgust bursting from all LEGAL Americans. My parents took the right road to this country and raised my family to believe in the law and to be proud of being Mexican-Americans, not Mexicans living in America. There is a grave difference between being proud of your heritage and background and placing it above your duties and loyalties as an American. This is the U.S.A.....not Mexico, Panama, Columbia, etc. If you don't like it here enough to become an American (including learning English and not living in self-imposed cultural enclaves within larger cities), then please....GO BACK and try your pathetic protests in the countries whose flags you wave in our faces. See how far that flys. I'm American....not Mexican!

Posted by: Carlos | March 31, 2006 04:14 PM

There is nothing wrong with immigration.We have laws, rules and regulations, set up on our behalf, by our elected representatives,found to be just, by our judicial branch, and to be obeyed by all, within our borders.There are quotas, which are being ignored.The system was set up, so as to not over burden infrastructure or to unfairly affect wages.Like in every thing else since 1980, corporate monry has bought government to the point that citizens of this country are paying the taxes, only to be shortchanged in returned.Illegal workers in this country are the reason minimum,and all other wages, except government,are half what they should be.There has been a concerted effort to push this off on the american people far longer than recently.Please see http://npublici.blogspot.com ,while we still have most of our freedom of speech left.

Posted by: Del Allegood | March 31, 2006 04:17 PM

does it hurt when I put it in, and bang your head against the wall of democracy...


when it's corruption that you're used to?

Posted by: I thought it was miller time... | March 31, 2006 04:19 PM

There is nothing wrong with immigration.We have laws, rules and regulations, set up on our behalf, by our elected representatives,found to be just, by our judicial branch, and to be obeyed by all, within our borders.There are quotas, which are being ignored.The system was set up, so as to not over burden infrastructure or to unfairly affect wages.Like in every thing else since 1980, corporate monry has bought government to the point that citizens of this country are paying the taxes, only to be shortchanged in return Illegal workers in this country are the reason minimum,and all other wages, except government,are half what they should be.There has been a concerted effort to push this off on the american people far longer than recently.Please see http://npublici.blogspot.com ,while we still have most of our freedom of speech left.

Posted by: Del Allegood | March 31, 2006 04:20 PM

Cassini asked:
"The big gquestion that is running thru my mind is why havent they been enforcing the laws up to now?"

First, both republicans and democrats respond to the corporations that donate to them and lobby them. Guess what they don't want enforced? Corporations large and small benefit by hiring illegals. The fines are so low and enforcement even lower that the whole process has become a joke. Lawyers even advise companies not to worry about checking employment documents too well since the chance of any enforcement is next to nil.

Like the deal with the ports, the government has normally tilted toward what their doners want until the people take notice and speak up. That is happening now and many politicians are running for cover as they did with the ports deal. That is why I believe this is not going away. The more people know about illegal immigration, its effects on America and its workers, and the security aspect of not checking 12 million people living within our borders, the more they will wonder why companies are not being fined and illegals arrested and deported.

You see, politicians are like elementary particles, they act differently when being observed, and right now the spotlight is on Congress over illegal immigration. Their political positions are at stake, so I expect any votes for amnesty will be taken care of this fall but most will vote for their own jobs over those of the illegal's and vote to make being here a felony and increase the fines and enforcement on companies ... at least until Americans are not looking in a few years and they drop the ball again...

Posted by: Sully | March 31, 2006 04:24 PM

All one need do is read these comments and we can see that 99% of AMERICAN citizens feel the same way. We want to stop illegal immigration. If it is not feasable to deport illegals then we need to enforce the law so that employers cannot hire illegals.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I have seen first hand how this issue is effecting our country and most especially our shrinking middle class.
I have seen and worked for the greedy employers that know full well they are hiring illegals, and they pay them a pittance. I have seen first hand and continue to see that these illegal immigrants, and indeed many immigrants have no desire to assimilate into the American culture. If you came to where I am now you might think you were in Mexico instead of Florida from all of the trash left on the ground by people that think it is a dumping ground.
No one in this debate is racist, my girlfriend is of Mexican decent and I have hispanic friends, but if any one of us broke the law we would pay the consequences, why are the Mexicans here illegaly any different?
Thisi talk about thier doing jobs no American would want is bull as well. No American would want to do these jobs for the slave labor wages the illegals are getting this is true. The ONLY reason that our elected officals are ignoring uson this is to provide cheap labor, drive down labor prices accross the board so that the rich can get richer and to hell with the rest of us.
Go to this web site:http://www.webslingerz.com/jhoffman/congress-email.html
Write to your congressman and senator and tell them to stop abusing the American public. Enough is enough, lets stand together on this.
Greg

Posted by: Gregory | March 31, 2006 04:26 PM

Let me get this straight. I'm a racist, anti-immigrant bully because I want people that entered this country illegally and profited from it's benefits to face the on-the-books legal ramifications? Illegal aliens are the same people who insist on Mexican government representation when they are arrested for violent crimes and face the death penalty. They are the same people who run for the border and are hidden by the corrupt Mexican government when they rape, kill and murder American citizens. They are the same people who sneer and curse at American citizens who don't speak Spanish....in Texas, California, Arizona, etc. I don't give a damn if you're from Mexico, Canada, England or Mars. If you came into this country illegally, you should be treated like the invader you are, then prosecuted and sentenced to the full letter of the law. We'll fine thousands of dollars for bringing in a freakin' apple from out of the country, but give these people a pass?

Posted by: Charles | March 31, 2006 04:28 PM

I have no problem with legal Immigration, what I have a problem with is when I am in line at the local western union and the person standing in front of me does not speak english nor make the attempt and they are sending thousands of dollars to Mexico. What I have a problem with is the Mexican government being so okay with their people breaking the law they have considered giving a seat in their Government to someone to represent the state of America!

What I have a problem with is illegal people driving down our wages and making it hard to get a job at McDonalds for those in need.

One of the posters said Illegal Immigrants are only trying to take back states that belonged to Mexico to begin with, well please point out in the History Books when NC SC and assorted other states belonged to Mexico? Because I am from NC and can tell you there are tons of Illegal Immigrants here!

Come legally and we will welcome sneak across the border and we will send you the heck home! I feel bad for all those who actually do the work to get here and work to become citizens, we are doing them a huge disservice.

One other thing if a mother sneaks across the border the night her baby is due because she knows a baby born here is a citizen she needs jailed and we do need to change this law! Illegal is Illegal, Can normal Americna Citizens pick the laws we want to follow? If so there are a few that I would like to break! As long as I wont be jailed.

Posted by: April | March 31, 2006 04:31 PM

D-
I was watching Newt Gingrich on Faux News last night and found myself nodding my head, agreeing with him. Then the room spun and I put my head between my legs. When did the devil incarnate start making so much sense?
====

Wiccan, embrace the power of the dark side :)

Posted by: D. | March 31, 2006 04:52 PM

Damn right Carlos, all this talk is MADNESS!, MADNESS! (stolen from Bridge Over the River Kwai). Lets kick the Aztlans out now, all of them, now. We can work on assimilating the rest. But no more illegals, ever.

Posted by: johnnyg in NE DC | March 31, 2006 04:56 PM

D.-

ROFLMAO!!!

Love of country does not recognize red or blue, just red, white & blue.

Posted by: wiccan | March 31, 2006 04:57 PM

Wiccan - Amen brother. Amen.

Posted by: D. | March 31, 2006 04:59 PM

NO MORE IMMIGRANTS FROM SOUTH OF THE BORDER!!!!! Let Bush's "GOOD FRIEND"
VICENTE FOX KEEP HIS "BROWN LEECHES"
IN MEXICO!!!!!!!

Posted by: Ralph A. LaPaugh | March 31, 2006 05:07 PM

In most of these responses, underneath all the us vs. them rhetoric, all I hear is a deeply felt fear. I think it is a fear of change--the fact that LEGAL Latinos have outstripped African Americans as the largest minority and are still growing; the fact that Latinos are living in communities that were 100% white middle-class before; the fact that as an American citizen anywhere in this country on any given day you will hear Spanish spoken or see it written. What happened to "we are proud to be a country of immigrants"? What happened to appreciating people who come here to work hard and earn a better life for their family? Please tell me what is un-american (or for that matter, illegal)about that. The only explanation I can think of for this fear is something we used to think was immoral--it's called racism.

Posted by: Beth | March 31, 2006 05:14 PM

Cassini,

The behavior of anyone who crosses a foreign border with the intent of taking and holding a place on the other side, and without respect for the right of the foreign country to maintain the integrity of that border, can legitimetely be described as invasion, particularly when their home government is complicit in their actions. I do not, however, believe that the people engaged in this behavior, by and large, do so with the violently hostile intent generally associated with the term.

I have great sympathy with the poor, have been poor myself, at certain times in my life, and I ache for the suffering they go through. The conditions that drive people to take such risks, make such sacrifices, and behave so desperately, are abhorrent and inexcusable. I further believe that the US government and US corporate interests are complicit in the creation and maintenance of those desperate conditions, and that it would be right and moral to expend great effort to help them.

This is a complex and Machiavellian situation, one that is archetypal of the history of the US relationship with its neighbors to the south.

Mexico, in particular, is in the grip of an entrenched and ruthless oligarchy, under which very few are in control of nearly all the country's assets, systematically exploiting the vast majority of the population. The rich callously exploit the general opoulation of Mexico for their own petty profit, squandering resources and despoiling the land until the people and the land itself live in endless agony. Mexico needs a revolution.

The Mexican people who take the risks, take action, and make it to the US to make a better life for themselves and their families are admirable in many ways. They deserve our assistance and support. Their mass emigration from Mexico is, however, a tragedy, in that, by abandoning their homeland, they leave it to the tender mercies of the oligarchs who continue to ruin it.

I believe that they break their own hearts by turning their backs on their homeland, and that very many of them want nothing more than to make Mexico work. I think that it is for this reason that they cling as they do to their home culture as they do, to assuage the heartbreak and guilt they feel at having no means to save their homeland.

In some ways, it would be more appropriate to describe them as refugees than as invaders, but immigration is a lawful process, which makes it inappropriate to describe them as immigrants when they come without respect for the law. They could be fairly described as refugees, but to do so would be to acknowledge the travesty the Mexican power structure makes of human rights, and they consider the term refugee undignified and shameful, so they reject it.

They want to be immigrants, but they can't be immigrants unless they abide by the law. They could be refugees, but to do so, they would have to lay down their pride and admit that their homeland is a wretched tyranny. Trapped between pride and desperation, they pose as immigrants, but behave as invaders.

Posted by: Ken | March 31, 2006 05:34 PM

Beth-

Let's say you have a much nicer house than me (probably true). Tonight I am going to come to your house, let myself in the back door, take money from your desk, use it to pay the cab fare to bring my family over to your house, and we'll raid your refrigerator.


Now- when you wake up and find us there, are you going to clasp us to your breast and cry "Amigo!"?

Or are you going to call the police to arrest us for breaking and entering and theft?

Please let me know- the gang is hungry.

Posted by: wiccan | March 31, 2006 05:36 PM

Beth-

"Please tell me what is un-american (or for that matter, illegal)about that."

There is nothing illegal about coming here invited to earn a better life for one's family.

It is illegal "to bring to the United States from any place outside thereof (other than from foreign contiguous territory) any alien who does not have a valid passport and an unexpired visa, if a visa was required under this chapter or regulations issued thereunder" according to TITLE 8, CHAPTER 12, SUBCHAPTER II, Part VIII, Sec. 1323. of the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act.

Posted by: Will | March 31, 2006 05:37 PM

Bethy poo, stop confusing nationalism with racism. This shI# has got to stop.

Posted by: johnnyg in NE DC | March 31, 2006 05:58 PM

It is unfair to ask taxpayers to pay for illegal immigrants who do not pay taxes. What's the IRS form for a day laborer? And how fair is it to the immigrants who actually came here legally?

My parents waited 10 years before they were allowed into the U.S. in 1985, and I was naturalized when I was at 13 in 1993. And let's not forget, my parents came from a war torn country (Vietnam). When was the last time Mexico had a war in which the U.S. bombed it back into the Stone Age?

Beth, playing the "racist" card is a little insulting. I'm Asian, a much smaller group living in the country (3.6 percent), compared to Latino population (12.5 percent) (Source: U.S. 2000 Census). Yet, have you ever heard of a large Asian community getting angry and demanding special treatment and rights?

Posted by: Naturalized | March 31, 2006 06:02 PM

D. wrote:
===========================================
Good God, have the Red Staters and Blue Staters found a common ground? Pinch me.
===========================================

Yep. Because any citizen HATES folks who cut in line and sneak ahead of everyone else (especially waiting for hours in it); and folks get tired of criminals asking for every right and a free ride at everyone else's expense. No one likes to be had and used.

Such feelings know no party.

SandyK

Posted by: SandyK | March 31, 2006 06:07 PM

hey, a nice and healthy debate, gotta love it.

I wonder what is being written on the Spanish-language boards ;)

O.k. Now assuming that Bush and the House and Senate get together and create this guest worker program...how is that gonna work? What is that gonna change?

400,000 "temporary workers" per year will get the right to live and work here for what, 5, 6 years?

And this is supposed to affect the 12 million illegals already here, how?

O.k. then they get these "guest worker passes", too? So suddenly that number is 12 million 400,000? In the first year?

O.k. Let's hypothesize.

Suppose that we don't close the border. Soon.

IE how many illegals are sneaking across the border now anticipating these cards? Probably a few, huh?

But to continue. They get to stay for 5 years, legally. Now, if in the first 3 years, they marry an American citizen, or, are involved in the birth of a child on US soil, how does this change the equation, let's see...

if they marry a US citizen they immediately qualify for a K2 visa. Forget all the "guest worker" stuff, now they're applying for permanent residence, and they already have a green card.

I wonder what enterprising entrepreneur is going to see the money available to be made in this situation?

...and it's to be an additional 400,000 per year?

So in 5 years it'll be 2 million just "guest workers"?

I wonder how the math works out on this, long-term.

Posted by: cc | March 31, 2006 06:20 PM

Beth wrote:
===========================================
In most of these responses, underneath all the us vs. them rhetoric, all I hear is a deeply felt fear.
===========================================

It's not fear, it's sheer and utter anger. We feel used and abused. It's like guests who really overstayed their welcome, but insist on staying because they can get a free ride.

No fear in that, but it makes folks pretty riled. So much so, if the immigration bills aren't amended, come November there will be a clean sweep on BOTH sides of the aisle. Democrat and Republican -- as they're not listening to their voters.

Beth wrote:
===========================================
I think it is a fear of change--the fact that LEGAL Latinos have outstripped African Americans as the largest minority and are still growing; the fact that Latinos are living in communities that were 100% white middle-class before; the fact that as an American citizen anywhere in this country on any given day you will hear Spanish spoken or see it written.
===========================================

Again it's no fear. It's that everyone else had to do it, and these newcomers don't get any more special privledges.

Can't be both special and equal. Either a person is special (and not equal), or equal (with the responsibilities for being so). When a group is both, the many resent it with a passion. That is what folks are seeing in all of this -- it's not fear, it's not racism, it's about fairness.

Beth wrote:
===========================================
What happened to "we are proud to be a country of immigrants"? What happened to appreciating people who come here to work hard and earn a better life for their family? Please tell me what is un-american (or for that matter, illegal)about that.
===========================================

We're not pissing on LEGAL immigrants, but we're REALLY upset with I-L-L-E-G-A-L immigrants who break our laws. Absolutely nothing to do with legal immigrants -- who are vetted before entry, and have to prove they're an asset (not anarchists and extremists bent on overtaking our country).

Beth wrote:
===========================================
The only explanation I can think of for this fear is something we used to think was immoral--it's called racism.
===========================================

That don't fly. Because folks of all races, ethnic groups and walks of life are against ILLEGAL immigration. So you can drop that idea it's just White people upset, like yesterday.

SandyK

Posted by: SandyK | March 31, 2006 06:20 PM

Five Stars for Ken's post at 5:34 PM today.

Posted by: On the plantation | March 31, 2006 06:24 PM

Ken
(there really is a lot to comment on in this thread, is there a danger of the thread growing out of control, due to erroneous comments?)

"The Mexican people who take the risks, take action, and make it to the US to make a better life for themselves and their families are admirable in many ways. They deserve our assistance and support."

When you commit a crime in this country, you cede all rights and self-determination to the government, as a result of your action.

Why do we see these Mexicans or whatever, any differently?

I don't care if they hike across the Andes to get to the US border before they sneak in. They are sneaking in! If they are so strong and industrious, then let them demonstrate their skills in their own country, by building it up, instead of INVADING ours and screwing it up by breaking LOTS of our laws.

Check this out:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/31/AR2006033101021.html

In Los Angeles County, the 29,000-person town of Maywood has fashioned itself as a sanctuary for immigrants. The city is 96 percent Hispanic, and 70 percent of its residents are not citizens, said Mayor Pro Tem Felipe Aguirre.

Officials recently disbanded a traffic control unit because it was perceived as a threat to illegal immigrants without driver's licenses, Police Chief Bruce Leflar said.

And three years ago, he said, the city ended its traffic checkpoints for driver's licenses, registration, insurance and drunken driving because they were catching a large number of illegal immigrants.


SAY "NO MORE"!

While I wrote this, how many illegals came into the country?

Ah, but we are saving Iraq...

Posted by: cc | March 31, 2006 06:26 PM

Since I'm off and running, and have some time, there's more to be said.

Mexico is a Fascist oligarchy, Fascism being properly defined as the deliberate and systematic alignment of government policies with the profit-oriented policies of business interests. It is a system that is devoid of checks and balances, a system in which power has its way unchecked and rampant, and an environment in which the interests of the general population are ruthlessly trampled by a system that grows ever more entrenched and ruthless.

It is a system of misgovernment that is inherently conducive to corruption and lawlessness. Both in the form of unregulated corporate interests permitted to ignore long-term strategy, and in the form of desperate people willing to resort to banditry, Mexico is a textbook example of the consequences of a breakdown in the rule of law.

Mexican business callously exploits and devalues the value contributed by the working people and the conservation of human and other natural resources. Money is the only good, and all else is squandered. In this culture of corruption and crime, and Mexican government is an active partner.

For the US government to ignore these facts, and to sip tea with Mexican tyrants, is shameful and criminal. We are, to this extent, complicit in the desperate plight of the Mexican people. This should be cause for great shame to the people of the US.

The most repugnant feature of this debate is that each debater, almost without exception, seems to consider only one side of this complex set of issues. This is not all about the US, and it's not all about Mexico. It's mostly about exploitation, and if it's all about any single issue, it's all about power.

We, US citizen and Mexican alike, are being played for fools by a power structure amazingly skilled in social manipulation, represented by ruthless demagogues whose primary skill is not to lead, but to stand in front of a population and manipulate their emotions until they become a mob.

The tragedy of the US-Mexican border is that crossing the border does no one any good. The Mexicans who come here unlawfully condemn themselves to a life in the shadows, and the desperation of being ruthlessly exploited by US employers who see them as cheap, and as a way to impose their will on both the unlawful worker and on the citizens with whom they compete for jobs, depressing the wage market for all in the US.

Meanwhile, many of Mexico's best and brightest, desperate but capable, abandon their homeland in its hour of need. The families of those who make it the US are reduced to the status of parasites, unable to make any good of the situation in the homeland, surviving by means of handouts from relatives who are exploited and underpaid in the US, but still far better off than those they left behind. This is the endless heartbreak of the unlawful cross-border worker. Can there be any doubt that we are watching essentially noble people trapped in a situation not of their own making, forced to choose between dignity and survival?

This situation is unacceptable. Migration will never make it acceptable. It will not be fixed by fences, walls, or a million Border Patrol agents, because none of these tactics follow the problem to its source. The only truly viable solution to the issues created by unlawful entry to the US by desperate Mexicans trying to save themselves and their families is to follow the underlying issues back to their true source, to the corrupt and ruthless few who are the real authors of the Mexican tragedy.

One more time: Migration is not an answer, it is an act of desperation. Most Mexicans don't want to be Americans, they just want to be Mexicans with decent lives. We, through our governmental and corporate partnerships with the egregiously ruthless and corrupt governmental and corporate Mexican elite, are complicit in the creation and perpetuation of this tragedy.

This disaster has to be stopped at its source. I honestly don't know how this can be accomplished, but as I study the issues, I become more and more ashamed of the course of this whole debate, in which virtually all participants refuse to look past the ends of their own respective noses.

Posted by: Ken | March 31, 2006 06:27 PM

800,000 per year at past rates.

this is before we began to talk about actually blocking the border, mind you.

but at that rate that's 91 illegals per hour.

During the work day today, roughly 700 illegals snuck into the country. Over the upcoming weekend alone, over that 48 hour period? Some 4,000 illegal aliens will sneak in over the border.

Washington DC has a population of just under a million, in the past year, enough illegal aliens are sneaking into this country to repopulate it. Since we invaded Iraq in what, 2003? Enough illegals have snuck into the country to repopulate Northern Virginia.

How do we tolerate this?

Simple. Let's send our President to a) India to help outsource American jobs b) Mexico to help Mexican citizens help Latinos throughout South America obtain US citizenship more easily.

Not to mention C) waste the strength and assets of the US military on a pointless "police action" in the Middle East.

A classic "Closeau" maneuver! Send the police away, and leave the vault open for the criminals to walk in and take the money.

And we are worried about the lobbyists and the corporate executives, when the real criminals are the ones running the country.

Posted by: cc | March 31, 2006 06:35 PM

...if there are enough illegals here, they don't have to live "in the shadows"...

the more that come, the better for cheating US industries that employ them, and the cheating illegals that come here.

There really is no reason not to cheat more when cheating is doing very well for you and there is little chance that you will get caught cheating.

If, as the guy from Univision said, Mexicans can earn 40 times per hour compared to what they earn in Mexico for the same work, that's a lot of room for a whole lot more Mexicans to come here, before they have to start worrying about whether it is worth the money. And that is a hell of a lot more consumers for American business.

Posted by: cc | March 31, 2006 06:38 PM

cc,

I don't mean to excuse the criminal entry of Mexicans into the US. I'm not saying their behavior is acceptable. It's not.

I am saying that a fruitful debate is achieved by really hearing and understanding the position of the other side. Without accepting the behavior they pursue as a solution, I appreciate the desperation of their circumstances, and that they are, by and large, not trying to harm the US, but to save themselves.

I would strongly dispute any assertion that their behavior is acceptable, or that it is contributory to a viable solution to their national tragedy. It is neither. This is criminal behavior, and your assertion that it remains criminal, regardless of its underlying motivation, is correct.

I am NOT an advocate in favor of unlawful entry to the US by Mexicans or any foreign national. You may note that I, just a few hours ago, posted an argument that it is inappropriate to describe this behavior as "immigration."

It was I who posted an argument that the term "invader" should be added to this debate as a counterweight to the patently subversive term "undocumented worker."

Even after all those arguments, however, I continue to recognize the humanity of the people who see the US border, however wrongly, as a small barrier standing between themselves and what they desperately need, in order that they themselves and their families can survive.

Posted by: Ken | March 31, 2006 06:45 PM

Incidentally, the CIA estimates the rate of Mexican emigration to be in excess of five million per year. It's curious that the same US government claims that only one million a year are making it here.

Posted by: Ken | March 31, 2006 06:48 PM

"This disaster has to be stopped at its source. I honestly don't know how this can be accomplished, but as I study the issues, I become more and more ashamed of the course of this whole debate, in which virtually all participants refuse to look past the ends of their own respective noses"

...bulls--t.

The people of America are doing what they have been taught to do. Trust in the system. By these very same politicians that are running the system.

What is happening right now is that you are seeing the American public being rudely awakened to exactly what these politicians care about. A) getting reelected, B) getting paid.

Corporations pay them, votes get them reelected.

And if they can't appeal to the public at large, they change the public.

There is also a slight truth to the point of view that "this is inevitable" and that is just fueling the situation.

Bush will tell you that he is doing the opposite of the Mexican government and trying to "work with them to lead them out of their ways".

Cooperating with criminals, willingly, is still a criminal offense.

You can't have it both ways.

It is not the American people that are the problem, here. It is the government. And the problem lies squarely on the shoulders of both Congress and the President.

The problem is made *worse* by the fact that they both will benefit by making the problem worse.

And *that* is a fault of the American system of government, period.

Politicial thinkers have said this about "democracy" from Day 1: the fatal flaw of democracy is the idea that the will of the people should be followed, should determine government policy and law. We have a "perfect storm" here, in that the people we elected to represent us, are now worried about representing the people that *will* vote in the next election. Which will not necessarily be the same group of people.

Live by the sword...you die by it.

Posted by: cc234 | March 31, 2006 06:55 PM

Emily - You bum-doped us! Or, more accurately, your chart was both incorrect and out of date.

You write:

"Like the United States, France, India, Ireland, Mexico and New Zealand all automatically confer citizenship on anyone born within their territory, regardless of the citizenship of the child's parents."

1. France modified "jus soli" to only permit 18-year delayed citizenship after birth when both parents are not French. The "anchor baby's" utility for facilitating illegal immigration is limited by requiring the kid to wait until age 18 to apply for citizenship and the kid must have lived 5 years in France or Overseas territories, speak French, and pass a civics test. That isn't enough for Chirac's people, who are now revisiting birthright citizenship due to (a) massive illegal immigration in Mayotte, Guyana, Martinique and Guadaloupe where French rights coming from birth of an illegals baby are a bar to deportation; (b)the prevalence of Muslim mail order brides.

2. India used to have pure "jus soli". Due to abuses by poor Bangladeshis, it was modified on 1 July 1987 in the Citizenship Amendment Act so now, jus soli is conditional on at least one parent being Indian or from a few Commonwealth countries that extend citizenship to lawful Indian immigrants (UK, Australia, Canada). India is also a country that handles the illegal Pakistani immigration/security problem with 2700 miles of minefields, fencing, and armed soldiers. And has recently completed a 500km lethal voltage electric fence to keep out Bangladeshi economic refugees. (and the Bangladeshis in turn have fences and minefields keeping out Myanmarese) )

3. Ireland abandoned pure birthright citizenship in July 2004, after a national referandum had voted by 79% favoring to 20% opposed to end it - given Ireland was the last European country left to still give away citizenship....and by 2003...citizenship tourists - mostly from Africa and Muslim lands - had made 25% of new births in Ireland to foreigners seeking Irish rights. It was a vote encouraged by the EU, but denounced by Lefties as "racist" prior to the overwhelming approval....

4. New Zealand followed on January 1st, 2006 - ending birthright citizenship, since they had encountered a flood of illegals seeking to plant an anchor baby and stay.

5. Good old Mexico has jus soli on the books, but shockingly, just shockingly!! - few desperately poor Central Americans seeking work in Mexico or passage through try bothering to register their little potential nino or nina Mexican with the authorities..(Might have something to do with the fact that the gangs and Federales both prey on Guatemalans and others - robbing, seeking "mordita", and jailing and deporting any that "act up" by complaining about wealthy Mexican employers getting wage kickbacks, a rape here or there, or the temerity of illegal Central Americans showing up at the Ministry of Records wanting a birth certificate saying some low born Indian peasant baby is entitled to be a Mexican!) Apparantly, only a few thousand foreigners a decade have "availed" themselves of Mexicos generous "jus soli" policy it demands America give all Mexicans...and then only with a hefty "mordita" (bribe) or if the foreigner is influential.

***********************

The history of the last 25 years is country after country ending pure gifting of citizenship by birth. The UK stopped in 1981. Australia in 1986. Malta in 1992. Canada in 1996 stopped giving illegals anchor baby rights. France in 1998. Brazil in 2003 ended giving citizenship to babies of illegals dumped on Brazilian soil, but still give citizenship to any babies born of any foreigner there on a valid Visa.

And the history is of nations increasingly building fences and minefields to effectively keep economic refugees and security threats out. Israel effectively ended the Intifada when they ignored the Zionist Settler's pleas and erected secure high-tech electric capable razor wire topped fences using remote sensors, remote weaponry, TV feeds, and anti-tunneling detection - on the West Bank and Gaza borders or near borders (Israeli land grabbing). Botswana has just built an electric fence on it's Zimbabwe border to stop the flood of refugees undermining Botswanan sovereignity, security, and standard of living. It has 3 settings - off, stun, and lethal. It is negotiating with the African Union to set the fences on "lethal" voltage, as is South Africa on their Zimbabwe border.

India built their 500km electric fence with Bangladesh in 2002-3, taking just over a year. It has worked well.

America is now one of the very last nations, one of just a handful willing to give it's citizenship away as a gift to any pregnant female penetrating our borders, and the only nation that fails to guard it's borders against a substantial flood of economic refugees coming by land and sea. The reasons for both -- are our elected leaders -- who have been bought off for decades by the ruling elites that profit from illegal alien labor, embraced an Open Borders multi-culti philosophy driven by the Jewish elites determination that no more St Louis's would happen, and the idea that we had a "duty" to be generous and gift all anchor babies or we would upset the ghost of Emma Lazarus.

We need to chip her poem off the Statue of Liberty and chuck it in the fetid waters of NYC Harbor.

We need to end birthright citizenship tomorrow by law, and hopefully make it retroactive 10 years stripping citizenship from the spawn of illegals.

Posted by: Chris Ford | March 31, 2006 07:01 PM

So instead of banging your heads up against a wall, why dont you think of positive ways of helping them to "assimilate" legally into the U.S.?
"

cause they have "assimilated" themselves the moment they walked across the border or overstayed their visa?

They've shown that they can be criminals just like ordinary Americans...

It is simple, my illegal-immigrant amnesty-advocate friend.

The law is being broken, egregiously, on a regular basis. It is the Presidents' responsibility to ENFORCE the law, not to ENTICE more lawbreakers into this country.

It is Congress'

not George Bushs'

Congress' responsibility to make the law.

Bush is in the wrong place at the wrong time doing the wrong thing.

Period.

And there is little more to see and to do about this, than that.

Posted by: cc | March 31, 2006 07:01 PM

The American people have NEVER been taught to "trust in the system." The very foundation of the American system of government is overt distrust of governmental power's potential for abuse.

"Who shall guard the guardians?"

Posted by: Ken | March 31, 2006 07:02 PM

Chris Ford,

You'll impressively smart on the issue of birthright citizenship across nations. Your last post is very informative for sure.

Posted by: On the plantation | March 31, 2006 07:14 PM

What kind of a world is it when pregnant women cross borders to give birth? My parenting experience was to try to keep it to as close a radius from home as possible. And who is being served by the host for this most unnatural act, the child or parent, or both?

The buffet of services of rights laid out for illegal aliens is so bountiful, and the price is so small. Disneyland for the impoverished.

Posted by: On the plantation | March 31, 2006 07:22 PM

"The American people have NEVER been taught to "trust in the system." The very foundation of the American system of government is overt distrust of governmental power's potential for abuse."

....yes we have, by the very fact that being a law-abiding citizen is so necessary for advancement in this society.

And if you advance far enough, you get to make the law.

Hint.

Ah, screw the "indirect reference method"...if we wait for Congress or the President to do something to improve the system, they will let the system continue, or make it worse, favoring those who are benefitting from the current system even more than they are now, and screwing over those who are not benefitting. Yet we have been brainwashed (and whipped and beaten, and bribed) into believing/agreeing that playing along with the system is the only legitimate way to realize political/legal change in this country.

I mean, my God man, you cannot imagine that GW was unaware of the illegal immigration problem all those years he was Governor of Texas, or, Reagan when he was Governor of California. They turned this country into a "Red" country, now they are turning it into a red & brown country...

why?

MONEY

VOTES

POWER

who has it?

not the American working class, middle class and poor.

what do you expect to happen from here, that Bush will use the benefit of his Harvard education to make the system work in favor of the American people as a whole, all of a sudden?

No, just a select few...those he needs to get him and his party reelected. The 51% of America that he cares about.

Er, the 51% of the electoral votes.

And note that Californa is vastly under-represented in terms of both electoral votes and house votes. With Texas taking up much of the difference. All those empty border states and "heartland states", western states, to fill with people, to balance out the liberal East...

Where are they gonna come from?

Posted by: cc | March 31, 2006 07:42 PM

such irony

those liberal anglos

those Kennedy weeping-heart liberals

they are making their own poison

their very liberalism will be the death of their political aspirations

it is a fitting end

Kennedy has been reelected for years on the strength of the Irish vote

Now he will be voted out on the strength of the Hispanic vote

What else could be more fitting for a man who can't even own up to killing a woman in a drunken stupor

Posted by: cc | March 31, 2006 07:47 PM

ps

...if I were a woman, I think I'd rather give birth in a US hospital than in a Mexican hospital.

Posted by: cc | March 31, 2006 07:48 PM

"Maybe Americans ought to just go down to Mexico and take the land, resources and make the 51st state. We need it more than them, come on, don't be so selfish."


hm

that *would* be one way to get them to go back to Mexico.

But it would still make Mexico part of the US. An actual state.

You might want to rethink that.

Posted by: cc | March 31, 2006 07:50 PM

...

still, it makes me laugh that I could pack my rifle, catch a flight from BWI to Alberquerqe right now, or some border town, and hunt illegals tonight, and have a fair chance of bagging one before midnight.

I could always say, "it was dark, I thought he had a gun and was attacking me, so I shot in self-defense..."

and it might even be true, with all these drug guys sneaking in across the border with tons of dope.

You never know.

We just don't know.

But we know they're out there.

Claiming to be poor Mexicans just looking for work.

Posted by: cc | March 31, 2006 07:53 PM

My ancestors are from Ireland and Germany. They were driven from there by starvation, I want those countries back for my family! Somewhere in the posts I saw "Somebody should be taking pictures and round these people up" (not quote" something like that.) When all the high schools in the Monterey County emptied out and hit the streets WITH the principals and teachers, people who tried to get near, me included, with a video camera, were threatened by the POLICE, who were helping the 'demonstrators' (criminals). I am so tired of the doublespeak surrounding this issue. 'illegal citizens' ???? Like some posts above we need to remember, it is JUST PEOPLE BREAKING THE LAW!ILLEGAL!
Thirteen years ago, in Los Angeles, my daughter graduated from a top University, she had a lot of student loans (which she is just about finished paying.) She wanted to take a year off to catch her breath,as she had been working full time and school full time for 4 years. She went to the school district to apply, she was not even ALLOWED to apply, because she did not speak Spanish. About the "jobs we don't want". More Bush doublespeak! Monterey County has a big tourist industry. If you go to Pebble Beach, Carmel restaurants, upscale hotels, there are few caucasian workers. And these people make a LOT more than minimum wage! In Monterey County now, go to the courthouse here, the schools, the hospitals, the police department, ANY government office, and find there are ILLEGAL as well as Legal Mexicans working there. But VERY FEW caucasians.
Illegals own as many homes here as legal citizens. They just steal our identies and do whatever they want. They are here ILLEGALLY, and have been rewarded grandly. They have stolen our jobs, our country, why should they care that it's illegal? Why would they care that it's wrong to steal our identities?
When my sister's car was totaled and she was injured by a driver who had no liscense, no insurance, guess what happened to him? He just changed his identity and went back to work at a big construction company. Her insurance paid, now she pays twice as much as before for car insurance.
Well, I've written to the House, the Senators, and I know it will do no good. I've thought for years they should all be thrown out on their butts. But alas, there too, criminals are rewarded. The middle class ( the black, white, brown) LEGAL middle class citizens have paid and paid and paid. They are now the poor. And they still keep paying and paying and paying. This has nothing to do with prejudice. I am not. This has to do with criminals being rewarded. I have been tired of it for many years. But when I saw the flags this whole week, the Mexican flags being replaced by American flags, I was enraged, sickened. Is there an America left? Is it too late? What are we going to do? Much of the country's industry is owned by China, Saudi Arabia or some other foreign country. Thank you for listening people!

Posted by: Maude, Salinas, Ca | March 31, 2006 08:05 PM

...well, this will be my last post this week.

So far the arguments for legalizing these illegals and granting work permits come down to this:

"those that oppose it are cruel, mean, racist xenophobes".

Not true. We might be angry, righteous American citizens, but we all know the history of this country. Few if any of us are "Native Americans".
(and remember, even they are being overrun by illegals).

Then there's the economic argument. "We need them".

Sure, we need cheap labor.

Doesn't mean that we need ILLEGAL labor.

If employers only *want* to pay someone a sub-standard wage, what good is it going to do to make them legal, or worse, citizens?

If they need someone, and they are willing to abide by the law themselves, they will pay what is necessary to get workers to do the jobs they need to get done. The presence of an illegal labor pool clearly means they don't have to pay as much for their labor, and also, they are profiting illegally from that labor.

Then there's the "touchy-feely" argument which is that these people are human beings, they are "living in the shadows". Yes, this is true. But they put themselves in this situation. They knowingly came here illegally, and are staying and working here illegally. You are asking us to want the law suspended -even reversed- for their benefit.

...is there anything else that you would like to do, for the benefit of those who live a life of crime?

I would like to remind you that we already have 2 million people in American prisons, with that population not expected to change substantially, anytime soon. If you wish to be a Sister of Mercy, go there. Being in prison is hell. Being an illegal immigrant doesn't seem to be so bad. I would bet a dollar for every illegal immigrant crossing the border right now, that anyone in prison ANYONE would rather be an illegal immigrant, than in prison.

Hell, by the time some of those guys get out, at least one of the illegals crossing as I write this, will have grandkids graduating from law school.

So I don't see any reason to have guest workers or to weaken or reverse immigration law, in terms of citizenship or anything.

Now...guess what is going to come out of Congress this week.

Sections of the border will be locked down by additional troops...we'll be lucky to see any real fencing or a wall, anywhere.

The guest worker program will happen, no question, along with a substantial increase in visa quotas, and some program to reduce paperwork and delays: it will be easier for many more people to get in the country to work, faster, for longer.

...so they don't need to sneak over illegally...we'll make it a lot easier for them to get in legally. And so employers don't have to hire these illegals, illegally, to get cheap labor...we'll make it a lot easier for them to get cheap labor.

Third and last but most important, all of these illegals will have to pay some fine and go through some hoops to get citizenship, BUT THEY WILL STILL BE ALLOWED TO APPLY FOR CITIZENSHIP. And to stay here while they go through the process. There are just too many votes on the table to keep this from happening, and to get them out would require the President to actually ENFORCE THE EXISTING LAW.

So he will no longer be obligated to enforce the existing law.

Bet on it.

Posted by: cc | March 31, 2006 08:07 PM

Perhaps the entire debate on the illegal migration to the United States needs to be transformed by "thinking outside the box".

I submit that it may be time for the United States and Mexico to consider merging our two countries, perhaps being called the United States of North America.

It is obvious the government of Mexico is broken - it's citizens are voting with their feet. Also, it is apparent that the migration of Mexicans into the United States is throwing wrenching changes into the system we have.

Before dismissing this wild idea out of hand, think of the advantages to the citizens of both countries, which include having a level playing field for labor, wage, enviromental, and other laws. Also, by negotating the many issues that merging our countries will bring up, Congress will finally have something useful to do, rather than looking for issues and laws to pass as they do now, so they can say they are "doing something" for their elecorate.

Admitedly, I haven't completly thought out this proposal & it's advantages as well as disadvantages, of which I'm sure there are many on both sides. On the whole, I believe that merging our countries will be of net benefit to both of the populations, and will bring great opportunity to our people.

Curious as to what others think of this idea, on both sides of the issue.

Posted by: A different thinker | March 31, 2006 08:52 PM

I will be interesting to see what the Politicos do with their legislation.

Either way they will pay.

Posted by: Richard Katz | March 31, 2006 08:53 PM

Thinker: "It is obvious the government of Mexico is broken - it's citizens are voting with their feet. Also, it is apparent that the migration of Mexicans into the United States is throwing wrenching changes into the system we have.

Bad idea. Do you know how dirt poor a large percentage of that country is? That would be disasterous.

Posted by: johnnyg in NE DC | March 31, 2006 09:07 PM

The Mexican oligarchy has "gifted" America with some 40 million legal and illegal castoffs. Now, given the cost, certain people have thought we could get some payback by taking extra Mexican land as compensation for having Mexico's surplus unwanteds shoved on us. Here is one such case, with a comment by "cc".

*******************

"Maybe Americans ought to just go down to Mexico and take the land, resources and make the 51st state. We need it more than them, come on, don't be so selfish."

hm that *would* be one way to get them to go back to Mexico. But it would still make Mexico part of the US. An actual state. You might want to rethink that.
Posted by: cc

*********************

A response. We do have the military power to dust the Mexicans. We wouldn't HAVE to make what we take a State. Make it a commonwealth or a territory until it proves it is ready for Statehood. (Though whatever we took it would start far ahead of the probability of Washington, DC ever becoming a State..)

My target would be Baja California. For 450 years of Euro settlement and for a thousand years before that of their vaunted human sacrifice Mesoamerican civilization - they have done nothing with Baja other than scattered fishing villages and construction of Tijuana to feed off geographical proximity to American jobs, commerce. The peninsula is relatively unsettled and barren.

So we take the place! With the added benefit of using Mexican-Americans in our military to fight and take it. If they refuse, they are stripped of citizenship and sent to Sonora where they end up picking tomatoes in the fields of some corrupt multimillionaire PRI official, maybe the same fields their Papi fled..

Baja. 3,000 miles of mostly undeveloped coastline. Beautiful beaches. Fertile soil and lots of resources. Just needs 8 combo electric gen/desalinization nuclear plants, better roads, and an irrigation piping system. And we leave Mexico the "Tijuana enclave". What could be better? Conquistagringos! A developer's dream. "Retire away from all those clogged, congested Mexican-filled States! Don't wait on Cancun and the Yucatan to fall to the Conquistagringos when Baja can be your beachfront dream place now!"

Posted by: Chris Ford | March 31, 2006 09:25 PM

...regardless of what the law is, or what the makeup of the country is that elects a Congress to write laws, it has to be enforced by the President, or, it is pointless to have the law.

What we have is a Congress which sits by happily while the President not only refuses to enforce the law, he actively works against the law.

On a number of fronts...not just illegal immigration.

This leave Congress to deal with the necessity of changing the law, to get the President to enforce it at all.

Congress is, apparently, perfectly willing to do that, however, if the alternative is to impeach and remove the President, and both houses of Congress and the President are members of the same political party, and especially if they all think they can ride to reelection on the backs of these same illegals that the President is supposed to keep out, and the corporations that pay them when they are here, violating laws against employing illegal aliens which the President is also supposed to enforce.

I for one am running out of adjectives to describe a situation where both political parties are abandoning border security, American workers and bending over backwards to accomodate business interests.

Perhaps Orwell would have an adequate phrase to describe it, something along the lines of "give them cheap TV sets and they'll be happy".

Posted by: cc | March 31, 2006 09:33 PM

....I mean, if you assume the "alarm" on border security and illegal immigrants running amok in the US after overstaying their visas, was 9/11, that was 5 years ago.

Maybe...in spite of all the flag-wearing and the swearing on the Holy Bible of 9/11, our government never really learned the lessons...they just paid lip-service to the text?

I mean, how can you really learn from a history textbook in history class if you're busy reading from the Neoconservatives' Guide to Nation-building in class?

Posted by: cc | March 31, 2006 09:43 PM

I love these posts! I've lived and travelled all around the world and the one constant I can count on when I talk to people and really begin to understand their cultures....NONE of them or their governments would EVER stand for the kinds of things these invaders and their apologists demand. See how that's working out for the EU's unassimilated Muslim population, eh? Try sneaking into other countries (hello...Mexico?), living for years under the radar and demanding the "rights" of a native citizen. See just how far that little happy tapdance will take you. We want immigrants here in the U.S....they are what made this country the great and diversified nation it is. What we don't want is unchecked, unlimited and undocumented aliens walking into OUR country and making demands. Yes, I said OUR country....black, white, brown, red, yellow...ancestors from Europe, Africa, China, Brazil, etc....doesn't matter to a real American with any sense of history (not the obvious bigots)...if you're here LEGALLY, you are now an AMERICAN first. Don't like it where you're from originally...CHANGE YOUR OWN DAMN COUNTRY, PAL, NOT MINE!

Posted by: Charles | March 31, 2006 09:45 PM

People who claim that America was built by immigrants are correct. But that was an entirely different situation to what is happening now! Our country is being overrun by Mexican immigrants seeking to escape their own country!! Our entire way of life and future is in jeopardy.

The politicians and business owners who are in favor of GUEST WORKER arrangements and the like, are doing so out of their own self interests. Whether it's to get re-elected - or because they 'got' elected - or because they need the cheap labor - it is such a reflection of the deteriorating state of this country. We are ROME circa a two thousand years ago, imploding in on ourselves. Money and the people who have it are all that matters.

The 'immigrants' who settled America over the last several hundred years did so under completely different circumstances and in much, much smaller numbers. Our infrastructure can't handle it today. Why should it? If I liked my neighbors house better across the street, I wouldn't just move in. And then protest when asked to leave because I had gotten used to the nice food and pleasent surroundings.

And for those who cite history or our constitution to defend the neverending the influx of mexicans into our country... You are idiots! You know nothing of history. The founding fathers could have never forseen the path this country has taken. In 1776 the United States was barely an equal to the other powers in the world. It was a exhausted, war-torn country that needed immigrants to grow it's economy. Times have changed. America now is a bastion of capitalism and democracy AND the only super power left in the world.

You can't let the policies of two hundred years ago govern us today. Yes, thousands of immigrants came to our country during the 1700's and 1800's, but people also had slaves then.

We could argue WHY all day - but the Mexicans in this country reproduce at almost three times the rate as the rest of the population. Even if we sealed the border and let the 'guest workers' (lol!) stay, the population by 2060 will be almost half Mexican. By the turn of the next century... America will be a latin country. Okay, to all you do-gooders who say... Latin? So what? As long as we're all still Americans. Well that's okay, but they'll be about 500 million of you. Do a little homework people. Read the latest census, read National Geographic. Someone tell me, what can I do? What can any one person, one American, do to stop this nightmare??

Posted by: chance | March 31, 2006 10:40 PM

Chance, please call your congressman. Also, please do so for me and others living in DC who do not have a voting representative or senator.

Posted by: johnnyg in NE DC | March 31, 2006 11:26 PM

First: to those who express the fear of the Latin Cultural invasion- yes it's real. So was the Irish cultural invasion, and the Italian cultural invasion, and the German cultural invasion, etc. We adapt and change. It's part of life. And hey, at least Latinos tend to take their family time seriously. Maybe we will all gain some additional family perks like more vacation days or, wait, wait, PAID maternity leave!
And to those who have expressed concern about immigrant cultures that repress women , you are refering to mostly legal immigrants who come here to avoid slaughter or starvation in their own countries. They often come as refugees and, yes, it can take a generation or two for them to assimilate. But abuses of women and children must be handled as individual criminal offenses when they occur. It is not only unjust to paint every Middle Eastern immigrant with that brush, it is simply untrue. I know and work with literally hundreds of Middle Eastern and African immigrants whose famlies are busting their tails so their girl children can get an education and have freer lives. The fact that most serial killers are white males didn't stop me from marrying a white male - serial killers are a minority of the population. The fact that some immigrants can't adjust to increased freedoms for women shouldn't be reason to judge all immigrants from certain cultures or religions by the actions of those few.

Second: to those who make the claim that "illegal is illegal": Yes, it is. But it's also reality. So let's deal with the causes of the problem - the biggest on of which is the fact that businesses are willing to hire these folks and the government simply doesn't have the resources to properly monitor the situation. Do any of you realize that while employers have to document an employee's legality in this country, there is no central database to which they must report that status? Come up with a viable way to take away the honey (jobs)and the ants (undocumented immigrants)quit coming.

Third: to those who claim the illegals are taking jobs from us: Well, I don't know about everywhere in the country, but in my region the fact has simply been that the area has seen so much growth that employers couldn't find enough employees willing to do the work at the wages offered. Now, when American employers hire "illegals" to work here, at least those same people are contributing by paying sales tax here - it's better than the companies farming out, say their telemarketing business, to India - we don't see any of that money.
A further note on this issue: I guarantee that if Mexicans were allowed to get guest worker visas and employers had to pay them the SAME wage as Americans, employers would be far more likely to hire Americans who speak fluent English and are less of a safety (read: insurance) risk.

Finally: to those who claim the majority of these people don't assimilate: that DEPENDS!
If you're talking about folks who come here hoping to work for a few years, save money, and go back home, you're right. No, they don't assimilate any more than our service men and women assimilate when they are shipped overseas. There's no reason to go to all that trouble - and believe me it IS hard work to learn a new language and culture.
Bur for those who come here to live and raise families, yes, they or their children DO assimilate. In fact, by the third generation, the VAST majority of immigrant kids don't even speak their grandparents' native language and many don't even understand a word of it. Neither my father nor my aunt learned any German while growing up, even though their father, a native born American, spoke it as his only language until he went to school.
One language acquisition fact for you all to keep in mind: It takes 5-7 YEARS of study to gain social fluency in a second language (to go shopping, hold a job, talk to freinds) and it can take up to 12 years to gain enough fluency to go to college. Considering that it costs my students over $2,000.00 a year (legals only. Illegals have to pay $9,000.00 a year)to take 12 hours of English classes a week (and we are CHEAP because we're a public community college) and considering that 19% of the LEGAL immigrants in my community live well below the poverty level, it is a wonder that any of them can afford to go to school and learn our language. But they make sacrifices because they WANT to be here. I've taught both Americans and immigrants and I much prefer the immigrants because they APPRECIATE the opportunities and freedoms they have here far more than most Americans. When it comes to appreciating this country, they are FAR more patriotic than the average American. Most of us simply don't understand how good we have it - even when it's bad, we don't truly get how much worse it is in other places.

Oh, and DC Dude, I'm NOT fresh out of college, this IS my area of expertise, and I've been researching these issues for nigh on 20 years! So come after ME with your fallacies persona and let's see where you get.

Posted by: D in Tennessee | April 1, 2006 12:04 AM

What bothers me most D in Tenn. is that protesters did not disply patriotism last week. And many were the children of illegals. Something is going terribly wrong.

Posted by: johnnyg in NE DC | April 1, 2006 12:18 AM

The interesting thing that I've noted about the debate is that those that are Americans that are for illegal immigrations


are hired by Mexico to lobby for them...


have a friend that is here illegally, know someone personally


or that they hire them and don't want to lose that...

I would assume that _you_ fall into the latter class....


and there have been numerous testiomonies that illegals take jobs..


I've seen _ENTIRE_ construction sites that were behind fences of illegals...


they can hire an entire crew from Mexico and build an apartment complex...electricians, plumbers, heavy equipment operators...and do on...


obviously you don't care about your fellow citizens....usually when that happens _you're_ getting a piece of the pie...


.

Posted by: Hello D in Tennessee... | April 1, 2006 12:28 AM

Need to enforce the law,


and require our congress people to act repsonsibly,


and abide by the laws that exist, zero tolerance for scofflaws...do the Guilliani thing, arrest for all crimes pertaining to congress peoples...


it cuts down on the big ones, like a war on false pretenses


we could _require_

our president and his _tribe_ to


quit giving our rights, our land, our children to his friends to


use as they see fit.


I don't think, that the few reich people that are controlling our government actually

have the right to say how the other 99.8%

of the rest of us live our lives...


I don't want to go to "war" to make sure Cheyney and his friends can bet on the oil_futures market and win..


I don't want to lose an entire class of people

blue-collar middle class

construction, factory workers, trade, drivers, agricultural, painting, electrical, plumbing, truck driving, etc.


because their jobs are _outsourced_

because their jobs are given to people that would make $4 dollars a day _max_ in Mehico, want to come here and take theirs away...


any more than I want to see my job as a computer tech go to India, because they'll do the same thing that I get paid more than 30 dollars an hour for for 37 cents and hour....


I don't believe in child labor or slavery either, both are practiced in India....slavery not so much...but...


I'm all for other countries getting ahead, not overnite, and not at the expense of _my_ class

the middle class

I'm perfectly willing to sacrifice George Bush's families share, and that includes his uncle Jeb, his brother Neil and his father's as they've probably stolen that money from me or someone _I_ know, or _you_ know

after all, this is what they do for a living

they inherited it, and their families taught them how to use the peasants since the Revolutionary War, when they voted to not let slaves learn how to read or write...

Posted by: again...WE, AMERICAN CITIZENS... | April 1, 2006 12:43 AM

you know so much, come on boyah!!

put it out theah...we'll talk uh...

this is your area of expertise eh?

when's the last time you worked in a factory?

when's the last time you worked construction?

when's the last time you tried to find a job outside of education?

when is the last time you did research by doing something other than referring to someone elses' work?

eh?

Posted by: Hey D, let's talk... | April 1, 2006 12:51 AM

is kinda good once in awhile, and you're accuracy is good...

but you're feeling a little hopeless to me here...


I mean after all, the CIA, NSA, FBI, Secret Service....are still made up of ordinary people

even if they are simply reading this as part of a program to "watch us" they're still _watching_

and there's always the possibility that they might turn states evidence...

as there are _still_ more of us than them.


it's just that the little people are afraid to speak up...

.

keep talking.
.

Posted by: cc...you know, going over the top.. | April 1, 2006 01:04 AM

Pro illegal Mexican immigration advocated like to frame this issue as "the right for people to seek a better life". Actually, a better slogan would be "the right for illegal immigrants to have hard working American tax payers pay for their expensive social services while they pay no taxes and contribute little to society except lower produce prices, elevated crime and increased drug use."

Posted by: JC | April 1, 2006 02:00 AM

Pro illegal Mexican immigration advocates like to frame this issue as "the right for people to seek a better life". Actually, a better slogan would be "the right for illegal immigrants to have hard working American tax payers pay for their expensive social services while they pay no taxes and contribute little to society except lower produce prices, elevated crime and increased drug use."

Posted by: JC | April 1, 2006 02:00 AM

Heather your wannbe Nazi movement called mexica is enough to make me want all and anybody illegal and formerly illegal and all their children born of illegals kicked out. You people have proven how much you think of citizenship in the US with the Nazi dogma saturated group called mexica. I say NAY to such disloyalty and disrespect. Be gone with all illegals of any kind. Lets face it the knowledge based economy of America is faltering due the influx of poorly educated illegal immigrants.
I propose that we start bringing those outsourced jobs in India here for a tech edge we could really use hopefully bringing about a flury competition in the engineering sector. Once we kick out the illegals by doing the only sensible thing by tracking the companies that employ them and punish all severly. Then we can begin a true melting pot migration of people from all around the world. Not just lazy mexicans that want to take a short cut to citizenship and show their true colors as Nazi's of another skin via the "mexica movement". "W" was right in calling them the "salt of the earth". Because they are making America as baren as their homeland. Wake up hispanics you just don't get it do you? WE ARE SUCCESSFUL BECAUSE WE HAVE A KNOWLEDGE BASED ECONOMY. So just to get this straight KNOWLEDGE BASED ECONOMY=COLLEGE EDUCATION AND KNOWLEDGE BASED SERVICES. In conclusion aspiring to be nothing more than a day laborer is lazy to get an education which can be easily done by reading books and taking classes will get you jobs of true skill. Be gone Heather you and all mexicanazi's. Don't ever return. . .

Posted by: NO MEXICA NAZI'S ALLOWED | April 1, 2006 02:03 AM

Chris Ford wrote:
===========================================
America is now one of the very last nations, one of just a handful willing to give it's citizenship away as a gift to any pregnant female penetrating our borders, and the only nation that fails to guard it's borders against a substantial flood of economic refugees coming by land and sea. The reasons for both -- are our elected leaders -- who have been bought off for decades by the ruling elites that profit from illegal alien labor, embraced an Open Borders multi-culti philosophy driven by the Jewish elites determination that no more St Louis's would happen, and the idea that we had a "duty" to be generous and gift all anchor babies or we would upset the ghost of Emma Lazarus.
===========================================

Excellent post, Chris. Excellent post.

Now how can we as citizens rally to thwart the attempts to bring in like 30,000,000 people from that "grotesque worker" bill?

We have a lot of talk now, but what can individuals do to make sure Washington (and Emily) listen to the majority that's against this rewarding illegals?

Solutions anyone (more than a form email; an online petition)? Because this has to start now, before we don't have a USA anymore.

How about a 100,000,000 citizen march to show, not only Washington the overall sentiment of the people, the world too? If that's too much of a logistical headache, how about having some USA flag waving anti-illegal protesters to counter the ones that continue to take place?

It's a l-o-n-g time until November, and anything can sidetrack this issue by then (which always happens in politics). So we, the concerned, need to do something than just talk, something peaceful and something to get the air time these 15 year-old non voting kids are getting.

SandyK

Posted by: SandyK | April 1, 2006 03:44 AM

johnnyg in NE DC wrote:
===========================================
What bothers me most D in Tenn. is that protesters did not disply patriotism last week. And many were the children of illegals. Something is going terribly wrong.
===========================================

It's called a wasted generation. One that refuses to assimilate.

I'm like them, first generation offspring, but I was assimilated in a time where no one questioned it -- and it was shameful NOT too. Now folks don't even have to assimilate, they're more proud of their ancestor's homeland than the land they stoled from.

That's what's terribly wrong.

I say, let's put those minefield up. Get law enforcement to round those protesting kids up (in my locale they would, they put kids that protested open-campus lunches in jail for walking out of class to protest in front of the school. So why doesn't the law enforcement do the same out there?? It's a breakdown of discipline to defy authority, and kids need to learn there's consequences for defying it -- and it's not airtime to be a-holes).

SandyK

Posted by: SandyK | April 1, 2006 03:53 AM

So what about this Debaters?

Opinions split over red, white and green
Mexican flags divisive topic as principal shows his support for student protests

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/3758105.html

This is simply not acceptable. Students have NEVER gotten away with such behavior. During Vietnam, during the Bussing bellyho, and it should NOT start now.

Get the buses out and start booking those kids as juvenile delinquents. What to protest? Do it off school time -- this country is paying for these buttwipes to protest on our dime, and that has to stop point blank.

What is needed is Americans who are proud of this country to meet these 15 year-olds where ever they protest, with the star and stripes raised high. Make the kids see the consequences, and make them see there's a price to pay for freedom (and no radical BS, pure patriotic pride).
SandyK

Posted by: SandyK | April 1, 2006 05:22 AM

Viva Mexico unit in GA? What crap is this being taught to first grade students????

http://www.glc.k12.ga.us/BuilderV03/LPTools/LPShared/lpdisplay.asp?LPID=52045

Nope, that's not going to fly at all.

GA residents please contact the Georgia Department of Education (contact info on the right on this page), and let them know that indoctrination of "Viva Mexico" at 6 years-old is NOT tolerated...

http://www.georgiastandards.org/

SandyK

Posted by: SandyK | April 1, 2006 05:32 AM

Criticism aimed at the border barrier proposals turn a blind eye to the success of walls in the past, and how they work: Hadrian's wall, built by the Roman's to keep the Picts and the maurauding Irish tribe, the Scoti (now known as the Scots) out of civilized Roman Britain, and then of course the Great Wall of China. As Professor Edward Luttwak , at CSIS, explained long ago in his seminal work, "Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire" when he was at SAIS, these walls worked as long as they were worked by diligent garrisons, not because they were impermeable, but because they channelled breaches into manageable focal points where the defenders could concentrate forces. They were, in modern defense-speak, "force multipliers". They failed only when they were no longer used as a systemic defense, in the case of Hadrian's Wall after the Legions were withdrawn from Britain, or when assaulted by anoverwhelming organized military force, in the case of the Great Wall and the Mongols.

Posted by: Mike Deal | April 1, 2006 08:24 AM

U.S. authorities, especially members of the Congress have been looking the other way when an illegal alien is hired in the U.S., especially by agricultural interests, Walmart, Bank of America, etc. If they only make these employers pay heavy fines when they are found to have hired illegals, most of the problems of illegals will disappear. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other vested interests have been circumventing the existing U.S. laws. Can you believe that in 2004, only three employers of illegals have been investigated?

Posted by: Sam | April 1, 2006 09:05 AM

that would slow down the impetus to try and save the company money...

.

Posted by: Heavy fines, how about charging the hiring agent with a felony? | April 1, 2006 10:34 AM

you need to let her _defend_ herself...


part of posting, being an announcer, being a journalist

has to do with pressing the truth forward not pursuing a personal agenda that hides that.


any persons journey includes learning.


if a person needs to feel that they know everything from the beginning...they never learn, it's all about image.


anyone who posts in a public forum, _will_ be attacked

taking that personally is refusing to grow.


IF someone offers an isight as to your character that is _a truth_ even if it makes you look bad, thank them.


Debate is at best a good way for arriving in the vicinity of _truth_

at some point you have to check the _intent_ of the poster, not the so called _facts_ that they are pushing towards you...

intent is _everything_

it allows you to determine if a certain ex Senator from NM is about the truth or getting paid....


I mean a lawyer will represent anyone, even a guilty party right?


check the intent of the words.


and police your own words....


part of dialoguing is being _self regulating_

how can anyone arrive at the best solution for solving

_anything_


IF the people involved aren't looking for the best solution,

they are looking for the solution that works best for their immediate situation

like bush not looking for alternative energy situations because

_he's_ got oil interests


invasion of a country with the 2nd largest oil reserves in the _world_ , fits in nicely to his

shown, _intent_


when the _works_

don't match the talk


well, you can see _his_ intent is self serving

and that is not helping the United States out

even a little bit,

since you're in a position of being able to put a spin on things to help a friend or two


don't,


because _like bush_ it may affect more than just your friends....ask the thousands that have died because he's wed to oil and pleasing his dad and paying old debts to friends...

.

Posted by: regarding D jumping in to "defend" Emily... | April 1, 2006 10:47 AM

Look. Let me get this straight. A few hundred years ago, a handful of white Europeans came into this land to escape--whatever--religious persecution, oppressive feudal practices, or lack of economic opportunity.

Immediately, they set about displacing the various native cultures that had already established themselves here, insisting that they (the native inhabitants) must now adapt to the cultural, religious and social customs of the Europeans. They took their lands, slaughtered a good many of their people and rounded them up and put them on reservations.

Now, in the 21st century, it is the descendants of those native inhabitants who are moving back into their native lands and making demands of their own.

And we are now carping and complaining and sermonizing and moralizing? Hey. What goes around comes around.

Posted by: Jaxas | April 1, 2006 10:49 AM

And, I will make one other point here: Resorting to uber-nationalistic rhetoric about what it means to be an "American" is just plain silly. America is no different than any other empire in history. It rises, shines for a time in the constellations of history, then like all others before it, it burns out only to be replace by another empire with a different name.

Nothing lasts forever. Nothing is written. There is no law in Heaven or anywhere else in the cosmos that says that America is the last word in civilization.

Posted by: Jaxas | April 1, 2006 10:58 AM

someone did it before, so it's all right to do it now...


look, you actually want the world to be a better place or just validate your anger at Uncle Tommy?


I happen to be of Tsalgi/Cherokee heritage, that okay with you?


The world is a complicated place, try this idea out for size, engineering is about making decisions based upon what works best..


you want the world to be a good place to live in, there's got to be a model...


you think 3rd world morality is what we need here, hey, let's send your job to India...or just threaten to..

I suggest you stand up for yourself in your own life rather than presuming that the rest of us are bullies and we deserve whatever happens to us...I suggest that you take your own psychodrama and act it out with your mother and resolve your parental issues...

buddy.

Posted by: hello penniless... | April 1, 2006 11:02 AM

You ask why the illegal aliens don't demand changes in the country of their origin? Maybe because like Mexico most countries discourage protests with 30 caliber rounds. Takes a lot of the fun out of it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tlatelolco_massacre

Posted by: richard | April 1, 2006 11:30 AM

I thought it was the descendants of the Spanish, or is it the Aztecs or Mayans, the Navajo hated the Apache and the Hopi considered themselves to be the original peoples...


they say they remembered the Navajo coming across from Siberia during the last ice age and teaching them how to start fires and hunt in the new land...the Navajo were the newcomers according to the Hopi...

but you know all that right?

conquests, war, dirty dealing

'cause it happened in the past we need to fix it now?

no, we need to fix the dirty dealings that are going on _now_

to establish some beach head on an eroding value system, that used to have a little a nodding aquaintance with integrity

.

Posted by: the descendants of those native inhabitants... | April 1, 2006 11:33 AM

IF the United States is totally dishonest and willing to sell it own citizens out to embrace a cheaper labor market...


what hope does Mexico have in the long run?


we're embracing corruption as a way of life right...


then there is no hope.


.

and why did we fight for child labor laws and women's rights?

because there was money in it?

and unions what was their original purpose before _they_ became corrupt?

40 hour work week, where did that come from, someone just pulled it out of their anus?

.

Posted by: there's more than one way to skin a cat.. | April 1, 2006 11:41 AM

No matter which side of the illegal alien debate you are on, thought should be given to the fact that our natural resources and utility infrastructures are not capable of handling huge increases in population such as happens with mass illegal immigration from Mexico. (both instantaneous and in the long term by children of the illegals)

Already the southwest and west are running out of water, fighting over water rights. The electricity grid is overtaxed, with rolling brownouts and blackouts predicted to be a regular occurence starting in 2008 along the entire west coast service area. (we have been getting just a taste of this in the last few years) The electrical grids for the entire country are antiquated and overtaxed by a swelling population of users and construction unforeseen when they were constructed years ago.

What happens to our 'quality of life' when our utility infrastructure and natural resources cannot handle the sheer numbers here? We were already headed for big trouble - add a million illegals per year, plus their offspring, and the emergency will be upon us much, much sooner. You think people are pissed at the illegals now? Wait until they are losing power regularly in their homes, and paying skyrocketing prices for rationed water and undependable electrical power - THEN you will see some real anger over uncontrolled immigration.

I'm a social liberal who is against illegal immigration. Yes, I feel for those in Mexico and elesewhere, but it is the sheer NUMBER of illegals that presents the problem - not what color they are, or where they are from. I'm not a racist, or afraid - I'm ANGRY. Angry that our citizen lower class has been sold out for cheap labor and profits while many whine about the poor Mexicans and how they have a human right to come here illegally and take jobs from citizens, use social services they didn't contribute money for, and depress wages for those who are here legally. What the hell are we thinking? How dare we wish to protect our citizens and dwindling resources before taking care of everyone else? This whole 'debate' is insane, folks.

A lot of illegals moved from ag jobs to construction and related areas, where their presence cost needy Americans jobs and small businesses to have to hire illegals or be driven out of business by illegal worker-hiring competitors who could thereby underbid them. They have been successful because of the housing boom. The boom is over, and sales are shrinking, so construction will slow and eventually stagnate. What will happen then? The illegals will move into another area of employment of the lower sector, taking jobs from Americans, depressing wages, and the entire sad scenario repeats itself.

Some advise that the lower class educate itself and move up the economic ladder when the jobs are taken or wages depressed by illegals. What a cute idea. However, there is already a sizable number of college-educated citizens who are either underemployed or unemployed - what happens to them when the ranks of their competition for existing jobs is swelled even further by masses of people trying to 'move up' the job ladder because of the affects of illegal immigration? The huge influx of illegals will adversely affect every one of us who is not super wealthy, sooner or later. (that should give us a hint about who mass ilegal immigration really benefits)

The days when America could afford to welcome uncontrolled mass immigration of low skilled, low educated workers are, sadly, long gone. Wake up before the entire country is eventually ruined for our children by our laudable but misguided altruism.

On the bright side, once uncontrolled immigration has turned the USA into a third world sinkhole of massive poverty and serious natural resource shortages, our problem of everyone wanting to come here will be over.

Everyone who wants uncontrolled immigration to continue, please invite all the illegals to live in YOUR house. Pay all their emergency medical care from YOUR own pocket. Let them drive YOUR car under YOUR insurance, without a driver's license. Give jobs to all YOUR citizen neighbors who are displaced by illegal workers. Pay for the schooling of the illegal's children from YOUR savings. Constrain YOUR use of water and electricity to offset the overburdening of our resources. Do all that then tell us again how illegal immigration of millions upon millions of people already here, and more of about a million a year, won't hurt us or our children.

Posted by: liberal against mass immigration | April 1, 2006 11:49 AM

you're mixing metaphors and facts...

but you're close.

the elite run America.

there were two factions at the beginning, the wealthy republicans that were for a government by the wealthy for the wealthy and the democrats that were for fair representation based upon what people wanted...

the wealthy have always been part of the process,

it's just that the current crop of wealthy have forgotten that they live in a democracy....

they've been winning elections by creating images and enforcing them as well as selling them, their actions don't match their words...

they created the _moron vote_ and even moronified the American public with their disinformation, thus hurting Americas ability to defend herself from internal or external enemies..

as how can she defend herself when she is in the drug induced stupor, nay, the affluent induced stupidity, that would have her sell the farm in order to make payments on her car...so that she no longer has a place to live, or anyway to make food, or create anything that she doesn't buy from somewhere else..

this is an oil analogy...


and the economic advisors to America are telling her that we need to borrow money from China, using Montana as collateral, because there are terrorists

uh huh, sure there are....12 million illegals sneak in, we got no effin terrorists and we are in deep trouble...


anyway, that is the low-brow-stupidity of bush, cheyney, rumsfield, and the oil magnates, in cahoots with the robber barons....


they think that you won't catch on...they're right so far.

.

.

Posted by: dear cc... | April 1, 2006 11:58 AM

New Poll: Americans Favor a Guest Worker Plan
79% say illegal immigrants should have the chance to work here, but most want tougher enforcement too
By JYOTI THOTTAM

Posted Friday, Mar. 31, 2006

Americans polled by TIME magazine show strong support for a guest-worker program and a process for undocumented workers to become citizens, but they take a tough stance on securing the borders. And most do not want illegal immigrants to have access to health care, public education or driver's licenses.

In the telephone survey of 1004 adults, conducted Wednesday and Thursday, 79% say they favor a guest worker program that would allow illegal immigrants to remain in the U.S. for a fixed period of time -- the main provision of the bill proposed by Senators John McCain and Edward Kennedy that is now under fierce debate in Congress. Only 47% of those polled say they support the tougher measure backed by some House conservatives, deporting all illegal immigrants back to their home countries.

======================================================

What now SandyK, DC Dude, Chris Ford? Seems you guys are in the very minority on this issue despite claims to the otherwise.

Look like K Rove did his polling too...

BTW did any of you boycott any business you think employing illegals today? Or is it still inconvenient to your daily life?

Posted by: Borg | April 1, 2006 12:49 PM

Has anyone ever suggested offering Mexico admission into the United States voluntarily? They could divvy up their territories however they want and have a nationwide vote on whether or not to join the United States. That way, we wouldn't have to worry about borders anymore, and everyone could have a job helping to upgrade Mexico's infrastructure.

I'm not suggesting we take over the other half of Mexico that we didn't steal already, but that they be given a chance to decide. It seems to me to be a more reasonable suggestion than building a wall.

Just think, all of the factories that we outsourced to Mexico in the 1980's and 90's would employ Americans again, and there would be no motivation for Mexicans to immigrate illegally because they'd already be American citizens. It would reboot the worker-to-retiree ratio that currently "dooms" Social Security. Not to mention that Cancun's tourism dollars would be reflected in our GDP.

At the very least, it's more a more workable solution than tracking down and sending 11 million people back into Mexico, and then building a giant wall across our border.

If Mexicans overwhelmingly reject the proposal, then maybe we consider more draconian proposals that won't work either. Just an idea.

Shameless blog plug: http://intellectuallyidiotic.blogspot.com

Posted by: Kevin Cleary | April 1, 2006 01:11 PM

Borgie, are you that desperate? You do know that polls vary, right? And how they can be stacked (especially online ones)?

It's why it's not good to use them as a general measure of sentiment.

Here's a good example of the sentiment on illegal and legal immigration (and check the dates)...

http://www.npg.org/immpoll.html
http://rdu.news14.com/content/your%5Fnews/raleigh/?ArID=74731
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,155413,00.html
http://www.abqjournal.com/border2005/403253nm10-30-05.htm

And adding salt to the already festering wound (a 2002 Zogby poll)...

http://www.immigrationcontrol.com/AIC_Zogby_Mexican_Poll.htm

===========================================
Zogby found that a large majority of the Mexican population believes the southwest territory of the U.S. rightfully belongs to Mexico, and that Mexicans should have the right to enter the U.S. without first obtaining U.S. permission. By contrast, Zogby's survey of Americans conducted within a few days of the Mexican poll shows a large majority supports reducing immigration levels and wants the military deployed along the border to protect the U.S. from illegal immigration.
===========================================

Welcome to Statistics 101, Borgie!

SandyK

Posted by: | April 1, 2006 01:12 PM

Kevin Clearly (looking for content on his blog) wrote:
===========================================
I'm not suggesting we take over the other half of Mexico that we didn't steal already, but that they be given a chance to decide. It seems to me to be a more reasonable suggestion than building a wall.
===========================================

Who stoled what, Kevin? Did the Spanish just ask the Native Americans to hand over their country? The Mexican ancestors are just as bad as any North American's (including Canadians <-- which continued their social anthropology study experiments way into the 1950s!!!!).

So much wish to pipe down on that BS that who stoled more or what, because in ALL countries there has been a losing party. And the Mexicans are going to lose.

SandyK

Posted by: SandyK | April 1, 2006 01:17 PM

Those who claim that millions of illegal uneducated aliens are good for the economy are those who directly benefit from having cheap labor work their industries. The business owners are selling out the American middle class for short-term personal financial gain. The business owners save a few bucks and their profits go up, and meanwhile the infrastructure of our society gets degraded.

Even if the presence of millions of lower class Mexicans were actually beneficial to our economy as a whole (which they are not) it wouldn't be worth it. You can't put a price on culture. There are some things money can't buy. I, for one, would gladly pay more for goods and services if it meant keeping America from becoming a third world country.

Are you supporters of wide-open immigration so blind that you can't see what the mexicans are saying in their protests? They don't want to fit in and join the team. They believe that they have a right to be here. They believe they should be able to take over America and fly the mexican flag.

The reason the mexicans are leaving mexico and heading here is because our country is a better place. The reason America is better is because of the people. A country is a lot like a team or a company. It's the people that comprise a nation that determine the quality. If enough mexicans come here to benefit from our creations, from our works, they will take and they won't give. They will turn our country into another mexico, and it will crumble. Let them try to fix their own country. I'm not going to hold my breath, though. Mexico is a bad country because it is made up of mexicans.

Posted by: stegman | April 1, 2006 01:22 PM

again?

most people haven't thought anything through...


the people that are affected the most are blue-collar people...


ask 1004 of them if you want fairness in reporting...


or isn't that part of your position?


.

Posted by: and who owns Time magazine | April 1, 2006 01:22 PM

the rhetoric

"amnesty" appeals to people.


just like "family values" led us into supporting homophobia, dismissing womens rights, and the antichrist-ians used gawd to create a sense that their tribe was right...to pull the moron vote from the bible belters...


how about addressing the truth? that too hard or just incovenient?

like for your president?

.

Posted by: the other thing is this... | April 1, 2006 01:26 PM

And Democrats, if you're upset on the illegal immigration issue, send a message to the chairmain, Howard Dean...

http://www.issues2000.org/2004/Howard_Dean_Immigration.htm

His hue and cry now...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,190120,00.html

Republicans may just split over this issue, no matter how the bigwigs want to say otherwise. It's a REAL sore point between the Neo-Cons and Traditionals.

This is yet another tear...

http://www.amconmag.com/2006/2006_03_27/review1.html

Neo-Cons just need to go!

SandyK

Posted by: SandyK | April 1, 2006 01:30 PM

Stegman wrote:
===========================================
Are you supporters of wide-open immigration so blind that you can't see what the mexicans are saying in their protests? They don't want to fit in and join the team. They believe that they have a right to be here. They believe they should be able to take over America and fly the mexican flag.
===========================================

This ***2002*** Zogby poll (you opened the poll war, Borgie) ;) proves your viewpoint right, with hard numbers...

http://www.immigrationcontrol.com/AIC_Zogby_Mexican_Poll.htm

SandyK

Posted by: SandyK | April 1, 2006 01:34 PM

The Spanish enclaves of Ceuta and Melilla border Morocco, not Algeria. Thank you.

Posted by: Karl Olson | April 1, 2006 01:46 PM

Heads up, folks. If you didn't know this tidbit, it's time to see how this whole "guest worker" program began...

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/thedebate/2006/03/bornintheusa2.html#c15668579
http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/thedebate/2006/03/bornintheusa2.html#c15668711

Yo, Emily, let's have a debate on Bracero and it's aftermath? As it's the root of this whole Mexican border problem.

SandyK

Posted by: SandyK | April 1, 2006 01:57 PM

Emily Messner's question about our immigration law is - we should at least be with the rest of the Anglosphere. All those nations - the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland - even India and Canada - have ended the ability of illegals to come in, spawn an anchor baby...then demand to stay permanently for the "sake of your newest little citizen". In other areas of the law, we modified our code as criminals found loopholes to shield the fruits of their crime in their wive's or children's name...immigration should not be the exception.

**********************

Sandy K - You can join some good groups if you are interested, F.A.I.R. being the largest. US English is another. I would like to see marches...especially when the environmentalists and blacks realize that unchecked open immigration in the name of corporate business interests threatens not just the white working class but every goal those two groups hold near and dear. My personal quest is to irk various leaders by requesting the Emma Lazarus poem be chiseled off the base of the Statue of Liberty (where it was put by a society matron in 1905) and return the Statue to it's theme of "Liberty, Enlightening the World" - not "Liberty, Blindly Inviting the Billions of Wretched Refuse in the Worls In".

**********************

Jaxas - "Look. Let me get this straight. A few hundred years ago, a handful of white Europeans came into this land....Immediately, they set about displacing the various native cultures that had already established themselves here, insisting that they (the native inhabitants)...........Now, in the 21st century, it is the descendants of those native inhabitants who are moving back into their native lands and making demands of their own. And we are now carping and complaining and sermonizing and moralizing? Hey. What goes around comes around.

Posted by: Jaxas"

Indeed, Jaxas, that is the very 20th Century argument the native peoples of Der Volk made for their "right" to cross borders, invade and take back the ancient Teutonic homeland after they tired of all the Slavic complaining, moralizing, carping, and sermonizing.

How did you feel about the German Reconquista? Given the Germans were one of the great oppressed Victim Peoples, set on by Slavs, Huns, Romans, Vandals, Franks..driven from their native soil (break out the violins here) suffering 30% death rates in the Plague and 30 years war, threatened as target #1 by Jewish Bolshevikism which had killed 25 million by the mid 30s?

As native, indigenous people...did the Germans have moral authority on their side in the 20th Century to seek lebensraum and make Warsaw a German-speaking city??

*******************

Ah, I see finally a liberal environmentalist with an open mind writes!!! A liberal that actually has dollars and cents common sense and realizes the huge financial toll illegal immigration is taking on ordinary American citizens while the profits go to a handful of wealthy elites far, far from the harmed areas - I will respond to "liberal against mass immigration" later.

Posted by: Chris Ford | April 1, 2006 01:58 PM

liberal against ... : "This whole 'debate' is insane, folks."

Yes, it is, but at the very least, it shows how many stupid people live among us (e.g., see Jaxas' posts, above). Also, from this debate, I have learned what Aztlan is, and why the illegals were flying flags of a foreign country over ours (which was flown upside down).

I too am for some kind of ultra-mass demonstration. I welcome all of you here to DC for this one (even the hairly legged girls!). It would scare the bejeezus out of congress and the admisistration. I am mad as hell.

Che, you ignorant slut!

Posted by: johnnyg in NE DC | April 1, 2006 02:39 PM

Controlling guest workers -- here's a way. Have the soliciting employer (or co-op of employers) post a bond for each identified individual brought in. If the worker does not go back across the border after a stipulated period, as confirmed by our federal agents, then the bond is forfeited.

Posted by: On the plantation | April 1, 2006 03:03 PM

go away for a couple of hours...

SandyK-
"How about a 100,000,000 citizen march to show, not only Washington the overall sentiment of the people, the world too? If that's too much of a logistical headache, how about having some USA flag waving anti-illegal protesters to counter the ones that continue to take place."

What if every one of those citizens carried a sign: "Illegals can't vote but I will."

Kevin-
"I'm not suggesting we take over the other half of Mexico that we didn't steal already, but that they be given a chance to decide. It seems to me to be a more reasonable suggestion than building a wall."

Child- go back and read the Treaty of Guadelupe Hildago http://www.azteca.net/aztec/guadhida.html

We bought it far and square.

Borg-
"In the telephone survey of 1004 adults, conducted Wednesday and Thursday, 79% say they favor a guest worker program that would allow illegal immigrants to remain in the U.S. for a fixed period of time."

Sorry, can't fool me again. Fixed period of time means forever.

johnnyg- I'm there, with my sign! (see above)(I'll even shave my legs!)

Posted by: wiccan | April 1, 2006 03:05 PM

Sandy, as you probably know, the two-tier workforce is prevalent in many Latin countries. It is common, not only for the rich, but for low to mid-level classes to have servants cater to them. Most are treated like crap, and many children are born from as a result of the master of the house impregnating young servant girls.

We should reject this outright. It is un-American. So too is cheap labor formally limited to migrant workers, restaurants, hotels and Chinese laundries.

Posted by: johnnyg in NE DC | April 1, 2006 03:19 PM

wiccan, razors are optional! :)

Posted by: johnnyg in NE DC | April 1, 2006 03:33 PM

I used to live in the US - legally - as a student and by God I want to be an American. I left the US in 2004 after 8 long months of waiting for my work permit that never came. I waited patiently so that I could get on with life especially that my brand spanking new job was waiting for me in New Jersey (I used to live in Boston). As advised by the Homeland Security Department, I could stay in the country on my F-1 status while waiting for the verdict of my application.

I had to live on whatever fund/savings I had at that time to pay rent, utilities, food, etc. while waiting for the permit... It never came. I never heard back from them and every time I query, the answer is the all-to-familiar "It's still being processed." My wallet then started telling me that there is no more money and I had to decide for an action plan. I packed my things and go back to my home country after telling my then prospective employer that I was leaving, also after telling the NGO that I worked for in Boston, a foundation whose paycheck I gladly refused to accept even when they were going to pay me under-the-table.

Now, believe me when I tell you this. The pain, it hurts. But it was the right thing to do. I loved the US so much I just cannot bring myself to screw it over. I paid taxes, genuinely wanting to contribute and be a part of this great nation where hard-working people get opportunities to excel and not get screwed as much as if they are in third world nations. I kept telling myself that if I were to join this nation and to finally be an American, I should respect the values on top of which this country was built upon.

I hate my home country, it's much worse than Mexico (in each and every aspect) and we don't have the luxury of jumping over fence to solve our problems. At that one point of my life I had the opportunity to do just that - to jump over the fence. But no matter how hard life is for you, never take what's not yours to take and especially declaring to the people you have leeched on that you deserve all that! It's like proud of being a parasite with no dignity.

I am all for tighter border security and better immigration control in the US, even if it means ten thousand of paperwork that I need to do to qualify for a green card when it comes the time. If it's anything that needs to be fixed on your immigration bill, it is to not screw over people who are Americans at heart without the citizenship brand and get rid off all the leeches.

Posted by: Ardian | April 1, 2006 04:08 PM

A GOOD QUESTION - I DID NOT DEFINE A DEFINITION OF A BAD LAW. LET ME TRY. JOHN ADAMS SEDITION LAWS WAS BAD LAW. DRED SCOTT WAS A BAD LAW. THE RECENT RULING BY THE SUPREME COURT ON KELO VS NEW LONDON ON IMMINENT DOMAINS IS PERCEIVED BY MANY AS BAD LAW. IF SOME OF THE MAJOR BAD LAWS THAT WE HAVE HAD WERE NOT OVER TURNED WOMEN COULDN'T BE ABLE TO VOTE AND THOSE WHO WANNTED TO BUY A SOCIAL BEER WOULD BE BREAKING THE LAW. SO HOW DO OUR IMMIGRATION LAWS FIT INTO THIS; FIRST THEY ARE NOT INFORCEABLE. WE IN EFFECT HAVE OPEN BORDERS. SECONDLY THEY CREATE AN UNDER CLASS. DRED SCOTT WAS BAD ENOUGH, IN THAT IT SANCTIONED SEPERATE BUT EQUAL, OUR IMMIGRATION LAWS CREATE, SEPERATE BUT UNEQUAL. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE GET BACK TO THE ELLIS ISLAND APPROACH, CHECK THEM IN AND GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO BECAME CITIZENS. THE MILLIONS THAT CAME BEFORE THE HISPANICS WERE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO BECOME CITIZENS. IT WAS A PRIDEFUL THING AND IT ALLOWED THEM AND THEIR CHILDREN TO ASSIMILATE. DID THIS ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ON WHAT IS A BAD LAW?

Posted by: DANA SARGENT | April 1, 2006 06:36 PM

forget about the law, let's making hiring illegals a felony...

let them find their own way home...

let those already in line to come in legally remain in line and come in "like Ellis Island"


the others tried to _cut in line_


put their employers in jail, now.

.

Posted by: Dear Mr Sargent... | April 1, 2006 07:04 PM

Dana Sargent,

The thing is they don't want to assimilate. There won't be an Ellis Island, for they believe the USA is their country to overtake.

Nope, they'll have to get in the line, like everyone else. Go through all the background checks; the genealogical checks; the vaccinations and English testing. Anything else is an amnesty for lawbreakers.

If a country isn't going to enforce the laws on the books, then this country is run by anarchists. >:(

SandyK

Posted by: SandyK | April 1, 2006 07:17 PM

Perhaps this discussion could go deeper if it focused on "illegal employers" as much as "illegal immigrants." Look at reality; this is the traitor group that is getting a free pass.

As I went through my local rural Publix checkout line, I exchanged polite talk for another time with the about 60-year old male clerk, working earnestly for his wage, and dealing nicely in English.

Once home, I considered the impression; Publix is playing by the rules. Low-wages for sure, but tax compliant, HR diverse, operating in the open, paying all their taxes, serving the customer in English, and making space for the employee to work with dignity at their personal level.

Looking across industries, what is the comparison? We see bottom-feeder employers of servile illegal labor pay greater in after-tax wages than the citizen-checkout-clerk, there is little doubt. Why the bonus? They work primarily in industries that don't have postedcustomer prices, so anything they extract further by any means is a gain for the operator.

In those conditions, why is the illegal alien paid more than the efficient store clerk who works fast and knows English? Figure it out. The alien is deniable. Paid $10/hour (which is very good compared to the Publix clerk) in after-tax income, he simply melts away when he is not conveniently called on; dwelling temporarily in living conditions that are anything but permanent or contributing to a tax base.

Why this discrepancy on a micro basis? Because breaking the law continues to pay the illicit employer. Cash in, cash out, no further obligation, no accounting calculation of net revenue or profit to report on that part; and the illegal employer becomes fully complicit with the opportunist illegal alien employee.

The race to the bottom in wages for ordinary working people is not just in the industries aliens tend to inhabit; it affects the total system of employment.

The credibility of the U.S. federal government is in dire jeopardy, if it not already completely broken. Perhaps they do not care, as is most likely. If so, damn them for their unfaithful performance in maintaining the values and sense of equity that ordinary citizen Americans still, however stupidly, adhere to. We look to November regarding this issue with the greatest of interest. There may never have been a mid-term election with such potential impact, all surrounding this issue of illegal immigration.

Posted by: On the plantation | April 1, 2006 07:32 PM

Let me please shorten and simplify my previous lengthy post, which was a kind of discursive excursion I try normally to avoid: If we give a pass to illegal employees, we give a pass to illegal employers. We have been seriously underminded by our fellow citizens who engage in illegal hiring and their corporate entities. The spotlight, and the social sanctions, need to put these offenders on center stage.

Posted by: On the plantation | April 1, 2006 07:45 PM

Yes, it's a two prong problem. Both with illegals crossing over the border, and of employers trying to milk cheap labor (has anyone noticed the price of goods never go down, even with all the outsourcing and better ways of producing goods? They just make the items like 33% larger????).

I'm so sick of the business exploitation in this world. If you go on AOL (and pay for it this service), everything still has ugly ads all over the place. Come to sites like this and get 400kb+ ads per page. Can't read a magazine with ads all over, either. All this pushing folks to BUY BUY BUY, but also decry that Americans aren't saving. We're not saving because of the BUY BUY BUY mentality. From the $500 iPods, to the $5000 48"+ plasma TVs, to $900 baby carriages. Our debt is increasing at an astronomical rate, but bankruptcy is getting tighter. Then ad the financing due to credit cards and mortages to pay off the credit cards, this country is going to hell in a hand basket (just like Rome, when it's lust for goods caused incredible importation at incredible expense).

Add an influx of immigrants to this mix that strain the social services, when the till runs dry, not only the illegals will suffer the ENTIRE country would -- launching the worst depression on record (which will spill over to every country on Earth).

Globalists are almost banking on it. For what, a massive property grab????

Just time to get our house in order. Root out the illegals; make employers pay for being an accomplice in crime (for that's what they're doing); and man the borders to keep drugs and possible terrorists out.

SandyK
Waving a flag: "Don't assimilate? Go home!"

Posted by: SandyK | April 1, 2006 08:00 PM

If there is a single solution on one dimension, it is to publicly identify and close down illegal employers, putting them completely out of business, whatever their size or lobbying capacity.

Posted by: On the plantation | April 1, 2006 08:10 PM

Will entered,

"I would be interested to know if there were any countries that did have totally open borders and/or no immigration policy whatsoever (no incoming or outgoing documentation process, no VISA process, no Immigrant or Legal Permanent Resident status, no citizenship process, etc.). If the answer is no, as I suspect it to be, why should the United States be any different?

Mr. Will,

In my country there are no immigration policies. We have never found a need for such documentation. However it is difficult for our citizens to enter bordering countries, thus we cross at unguarded borders. It is an ancient tradition to cross borders without documentation; this tradition goes back before the advent of any written language. Why are we debating the return to this old conservative tradition?


Dr. Yad Sloof Lirpa

Posted by: Dr. Yad Sloof Lirpa | April 1, 2006 08:26 PM

As far I can tell, everyone who responded to my previous comment latched onto my comment about the Mexican War but ignored my proposal. Wouldn't offering Mexico statehood (either as a number of states, or as one big state) be more realistic than building a stupid wall around our country?

There seems to be a lot of anger in this discussion, and misdirected anger is dangerous whether it comes from liberals or conservatives. The bottom line is that these people are trying to improve their lives and the lives of their families. Blaming them for being born in another country is as stupid as patting ourselves on the back for having been born in the United States.

I'm not saying that statehood for Mexico is the best solution, or even a good solution, but it's certainly better than lining our border with landmines and a giant wall.

But at least 11 million people have immigrated here illegally, and it's not realistic to think that we can round them all up and send them back to Mexico. Like Jon Stewart said on "The Daily Show," "Remember Elian Gonzalez? Now times that by 11 million!" And I don't buy Sandy K's hype for a minute that Mexicans want to take over the United States. They want opportunities that their own country can't provide.

Furthermore, the xenophobic fear you exhibit at the protests sound an awful lot like white southerners during the Civil Rights era. They were peaceful protests that massed hundreds of thousands of people to air legitimate grievances. You claim they don't want to assimilate, but it would seem they've mastered an American tradition pretty well.

Yes, these people are being exploited, just as our ancestors were exploited when they came here. I'm not condoning it, but you seem to be all rage and no solutions.

You mention the business interests that exploit illegal labor, and you are right to do so. But, the businesses which exploit these people should be the primary target of your anger, not the people themselves. They go through hell and back just to get here. Still looking for content in your arguments.

Shameless blog plug: http://intellectuallyidiotic.blogspot.com

Posted by: Kevin Cleary | April 1, 2006 08:35 PM

"to air legitimate grievances" my ass. They are illegals.

However, I agree that any business should breaking the law should be punished severely.

Posted by: johnnyg in NE DC | April 1, 2006 08:45 PM

On the plantation:

"We have been seriously underminded by our fellow citizens who engage in illegal hiring and their corporate entities."

You have hit the nail on the head. How can a society hurt its own people to benefit those who are not? Answer: when the ruling elite decide it's in their best interest.

The best weapon we have is our vote. If you value the blue collar middle class, it's time to turn a fire hose on Congress.

Posted by: wiccan | April 1, 2006 08:47 PM

please disregard the first "should." You're right, I am angry.

Posted by: | April 1, 2006 08:47 PM

Mr. Cleary, your proposal surely will not fly with the Mexican ruling elite. It would appear war would be the only means to bring this about. Would such a course of action be worth the trouble?

Posted by: johnnyg in NE DC | April 1, 2006 08:54 PM

And we might as well not stop at annexing Mexico because its southern borders soon would be overrun. How about adding Guatamala, Honduras and Belize? Oh, I forgot Nicaragua. Might as well go for Cuba also.

Posted by: | April 1, 2006 11:48 PM

K Cleary - "Wouldn't offering Mexico statehood (either as a number of states, or as one big state) be more realistic than building a stupid wall around our country?"

Speaking of stupid, Kevin....Not only is Mexico still 110 million people after the 40 million + anchor babies they've pumped into the USA, but they are a radically different culture with a different language, with a living standard 1/3rd ours, and a 400 year long tradition of rampant corruption.

Your idea of absorbing Mexico into the USA would instantly lower American living standards as happened when Germany got East Germany and has had to spend trillions "bringing it up" to the level of the rest of the country. It would stick us with having 2 official languages, and a divided culture. Moreover, Mexican politics have always been "oppositional" to it's more powerful northern neighbor. So politics would be confrontational, and we don't even have the ethnic commonality that the Germans and Vietnamese had in their difficult reunifications. Adding Mexicos 11 Districts as States would mean 22 new Mexicans arriving at the US Senate, and over 100 Congressional Reps - all from parties with 80-year or more antipathy towards America. The worst thing is corruption. Mexico is 4X as corrupt as Louisiana, or certain locales in New Jersey...and we have been trying to root out endemic corruption in those two places for 200 years without success.

Cleary - "There seems to be a lot of anger in this discussion, and misdirected anger is dangerous whether it comes from liberals or conservatives. The bottom line is that these people are trying to improve their lives and the lives of their families."

If you wake up and find your house and yard full of trespassers "only seeking to better their lives", you'd come off your high moral horse and be pissed, too.

Cleary - "Blaming them for being born in another country is as stupid as patting ourselves on the back for having been born in the United States."

No one is blaming people for being born Mexican, Haitan, Chinese, or Congolese...we do blame them for violating our laws and invading us. As for patting yourself on the back for being American - as a Lefty - I think we have little cause to fear you will pat yourself on the back for being part of America under any circumstances.

Cleary - "I'm not saying that statehood for Mexico is the best solution, or even a good solution, but it's certainly better than lining our border with landmines and a giant wall."

Usually the people that propose "statehood" to solve a humanitarian problem are 6th graders or less saying the ME conflict will be "solved" as soon as Israel becomes the 51st State, Palestine the 52nd, and Iraq the 53rd so "we can have our teachers and mommies show them how to be nice."

Walls or walls and mines work. They preserve national sovereignity of democracies beset by opportunistic border violators or actual enemy like Al Qaeda sneaking in.

Finally, why would Mexico want to be part of the US, dilute their control over their national destiny to gringos - when the demographic Reconquista may very well succeed with no need to listen to any stinking Americans??

Posted by: Chris Ford | April 1, 2006 11:52 PM

We are witnessing the modern day fall of the Roman Empire. Yes, the fall happened for many reasons, one being the legalization of all their slaves. Hmmm, sounds familiar doesn't it?

Posted by: me in mexifornia | April 1, 2006 11:57 PM

to have these insights about how to actually solve the situation so that it's a win-win solution...


and to have the dickwads that run the country do their song and dance to ignore the obvious while they press on with their world dominating tactics to have the affluent corner 97.5% of the wealth into the hands of the .015% that actually rule the world...

and our people just sit around and say, we can't do anything about it...although _WE_ our country controls the _most_ significant amount of resources _and_ money...that's a fact.

what a larf...


all it takes is getting _this_ message out to the ordinary working public:


On the plantation:

"We have been seriously underminded by our fellow citizens who engage in illegal hiring and their corporate entities."

or as I said it:

regarding the laws about illegal aliens,

forget about the law, let's making hiring illegals a felony...

let them find their own way home...

let those already in line to come in legally remain in line and come in "like Ellis Island"


the others tried to _cut in line_


put their employers in jail, now.

.

Posted by: You know what's irritating? | April 2, 2006 12:35 AM

Cassini writes:
I'm just being totally realistic. Think about it. None of the things that you
are proposing in regards to "illegal immigrates" are going to happen. they are here and they are here to stay....

Drug use is here to stay
Alcohol abuse is here to stay
Incest is here to stay
Child abuse is here to stay
Spousal abuse is here to stay
Crime is here to stay

...So the best thing to do imho is to offer them amnesty, get them legal

Posted by: mark | April 2, 2006 12:46 AM

if your ordinary blue collar (former middle class) now odd jobbing, temp worker at two places knew that they could vote themselves a new life....

if they could just _frame_ what they needed to say...


if they knew that all that they needed to turn their lives around was to understand that:

On the plantation:

"We have been seriously underminded by our fellow citizens who engage in illegal hiring and their corporate entities."


Two things would change their lives back to the being well off and having healthcare, benefits and a good life...

well I think they would go for it, and they could even understand it well enough to vote on it.

under the heading of understanding, teach them these two things:

1. corporations are not acting in the best interests of citizens that they are claiming as their country of origin, and need to have their _favors_ rescinded...

a. outsourcing needs to be regulated

b. companies that move their physical
operations overseas that call
themselves American aren't, and get
treated as foreign competitors.

c. we need to bring back manufacturing
jobs to the United States, and
reestablish our blue-collar/trade
based, middle-class...so that
opportunity exists for everyone that
is a citizen.

2. hiring of "illegals" moves money out of the country, displaces American workers in the service sector and blue collar sector.


Further:
Our marginalized need to be reclaimed, brought back into a productive society, that exists to include the citizens of the entire spectrum of wealth, not just the upper 3%.

Posted by: _that_ is all that it would take... | April 2, 2006 12:49 AM

it's important to manage disease,

not embrace it...


you don't have to be afraid of it, to get rid of polio...


I love the sad little defeatist in you, it's so...

incredibly sexy, the way you roll over to get your tummy rubbed and just ask to be tolerated...


why don't you die?

thanks.

.

Posted by: Mark, are you satan? | April 2, 2006 12:54 AM

he can't die MNP, he is eternally damned (legalize incest, drug, spousal and child abuse, and crime because it is here to stay)

Posted by: | April 2, 2006 01:03 AM

steel toed boots,

while singing amazing grace...


until they joined in.


they sell disease and ask to be paid for it.


I'd like to pay them in person.

.

Posted by: I would like to kick cassini and el Naco around the room with | April 2, 2006 01:15 AM

Clearly (still seeking more free blog action) wrote:
===========================================
And I don't buy Sandy K's hype for a minute that Mexicans want to take over the United States. They want opportunities that their own country can't provide.
===========================================

Read the link, and start believing their own words...

http://www.immigrationcontrol.com/AIC_Zogby_Mexican_Poll.htm

Read the documentation...

http://www.immigrationcontrol.com/AIC+Zogby_Mexican_Opinion_Poll.doc

If you wish to live life with blinders on, don't accuse others of not seeing reality.

SandyK

Posted by: SandyK | April 2, 2006 05:00 AM

Too: I would like to kick cassini and el Naco around the room with

Message: That's totally unacceptable. Our message here isn't of hate, it's about law and order and keeping standards. Doing that crap is as bad as excusing illegal immigration. We're a nation of laws. Those who don't like the current laws change them, but they don't break them. A society without laws is anarchistic, and is doomed to die young.

SandyK

Posted by: SandyK | April 2, 2006 05:19 AM

Posted by: SandyK | April 2, 2006 07:55 AM

Here's a frightening article that basically describes how Austin Texas, its government and businesses, have taken advantage of the illegal immigrant to the detriment of Texans amd the illegals. This article should be read as a wake up call that illustrates the problem
http://are.berkeley.edu/APMP/pubs/i9news/illegalfuelaustin12599.html

Posted by: Sully | April 2, 2006 08:34 AM

News for the whiners, picking tomatoes is not hard work. Boring perhaps; and there's risk of bee stings. I work physically much harder than that six days a week.

Posted by: On the plantation | April 2, 2006 10:04 AM

There are a number of shames implicit in our current immigration situation. The most embarrassing is that it is exploitative. Employers (and they know who they are, do not mistake) who hire undocumented aliens cheat the employees (legal and illegal), cheat the tax system, and unfairly enrich themselves and share-holders). The system perpetuates the failing economic systems of the countries by making a relatively easy alternative to building domestic economies in those lands. And argument that "employees with appropriate skills cannot be found in the U. S." lets these businesses avoid funding higher education or other appropriate training for citizens/residents here. Without going into the "outsourcing" game, those are the basic exploitations of the present immigration "system."

But there are additional problems. Unfairness, an anathema to most Americans, is the present situation based on early 20th century precepts. We are no longer a land of wilderness and "infinite" opportunity. We are becoming a mature nation and need to assess the kinds of immigration policy that now suits our needs and anticipated future. That will require a thorough rethinking of U. S. Immigration. Fairness and prinicples of justice and liberty should guide the policy, not favoritism and prejudice. National legislative proposals are mere "band-aids"; a much more comprehensive approach is the only one that will bring a long-term solution.

Finally, as difficult as it may be, we must enforce our own law. In doing so, we must also be even-handed and show ourselves to have fair consideration of the hardships our actions may impose. Nevertheless, if we have one "legal" policy and another "illegal" policy we essentially have no policy. We are supposed to be this leadership country and we are in disarray with a basic issue like "how do you get in?" Rather than a cheap, stop-gap solution that won't last as long as it takes to sign the paper, we should have a realistic, fair, "American" solution that symbolizes our best thinking to a knotty problem.

Posted by: Jazzman | April 2, 2006 10:46 AM

From the NY Times.
Should we believe them?
But George J. Borjas, a professor of economics and social policy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, said he believed that the flow of migrants had significantly depressed wages for Americans in virtually all job categories and income levels.

His study found that the average annual wage loss for all American male workers from 1980 to 2000 was $1,200, or 4 percent, and nearly twice that, in percentage terms, for those without a high school diploma. The impact was also disproportionately high on African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans, Professor Borjas found.

"What this is, is a huge redistribution of wealth away from workers who compete with immigrants to those who employ them," he said.

Ahhhhh. W's "ownership" society.

Be an owner to get the money, screw the US workers, they don't count because they don't vote Republican and it they do, in the immortal words of the Honorable Mr Scalia, they are a bunch of "idiots".

Just my opinion.


http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/02/weekinreview/02broder.html

Posted by: RIchard Katz | April 2, 2006 11:08 AM

Did any of you boycott business establishments employing or catering to illegals today? No more quick pickmeup coffee, fast foods, fruits and veggies? Do you live in or contract to buy houses built by illegals. Still work in buildings cleaned by undocumented workers at night? Do you bank at ATMs forcing you to pick English or Espanol before you begin?

Or is it much too inconvenient to your daily life?


Yak yak yak. And more yak...


Desperate? May you live in an interesting time!

Posted by: Borg | April 2, 2006 11:51 AM

I am outraged by those who would perform the "duty" of what they are paid for, to the detriment of the society that they live within...


this is treasonous in the highest sense...


I think, if you were paying attention, I said "while singing Amazing Grace," that may have been symbolic of something

as that was a song about a slaver realizing what he was doing...

maybe you could take it as a little tongue in cheek

the steel toed boots, referring to blue collar...

but hey, whatever...


I'm not into punishing illegals, just those citizens that would attempt to sell the idea because they got paid to do so...

fact I'd arrest them, along with your president...

I'm okay with that.
.

Posted by: what I'd do and how I feel are two different things.. | April 2, 2006 11:51 AM

you've got a point, but we don't live in the 70's where anyone would pay attention to those actions..

we need to have some changes in legislation, illegals is just one level

there also needs to be action taken about outsourcing

and corporations that _claim_ to be American while in _action_ they are foreign, in that the effect of their actions is to undermine democracy, the American workers on _all_ levels and they take money out of a country and transport it to a _class_

American businesses, make America a better place to live within...

One of the things that impressed me about Japanese companies during the seventies, besides the quality of their products was the understanding that they displayed towards their setting:

the immediate vicinity of the facility of manufacturing was given contributions, roads were improved at _their_ expense, the facilities were geared towards being ecologically sensitive and the local town received money to improve services to the local people...


our people

are as much a resource as anything that we produce,

their feelings

are just as important as any product produced....

how we feel about the world we live within, flavors our life...there's no reason to be living with a bad taste in your mouth...

that is completely unnecessary, anyone trying to sell you something else is trying to sell you, on some level, slavery.

.

.

Posted by: dear borg buddy... | April 2, 2006 12:10 PM

John Leo writes on the Transnational Elites of both parties and why they oppose stopping mass immigration: "In the transnational view, patriotism, assimilation and cultural cohesion are obsolete concerns. Borders and the nation-state are on the way out. Transnational flows of populations are inevitable. Workers will move in response to markets, not old-fashioned national policies on immigration. Norms set by internationalists will gradually replace national laws and standards. The world is becoming a single place. Trying to impede this unifying process is folly.
The term "transnationals" specifically refers to those working in and around international organizations and multinational corporations. More broadly, it indicates a cosmopolitan elite with a declining allegiance to the place where they live and work, and a feeling that nationalism and patriotism are part of the past."

This is clearly a case where leaders of both Parties have come to agreement despite the wishes of the American public, in open contempt of those wishes.

The Republicans will say just toss red meat to the Evangelicals and they will fall in line as the Ruling Elite is favored with further enrichment, and the Democratic moneymen are utterly confident their "Head Negro Bosses" will keep the unemployed exploited black masses in line as illegal and legal immigration dislocates less educated blacks from any hope of becoming valued employees.

The "covered" discussion is about the multinationals and fatcats that want global capitalism, the rewards of productivity mostly going to the owners and funders of capital, and away from the workers.

Less covered, but just as important are the wealthy and powerful on the Left that support eroding American sovereignity and flooding America with the "oppressed". They use NGOs, international law, and control of media and other "idea" centers to push their various agendas...Agendas which don't even work in harmony, as the Lefties will readily admit...because conflict is sought to some extent. So they are pro-gay, Pro-Islamic, pro Open Borders, anti-death penalty but pro "revolutionary" armed resistance including some acts of terrorism.

The "International Jew" plays a prominaent part in that. A pattern of seeking no loyalty to any nation, a freedom to cross any border to gain further wealth. In the Soviet Union, they were called "Cosmopolitans" after rejecting loyalty to the Communist Movement their forefathers had placed in Russia, and the Cosmopolitans or Internationalists started the movement to work off several passports to get the optimal tax avoidance and ability to move personal capital between countries, as well as try and remove immigration barriers. The were central to recasting the Statue of Liberty as the welcoming light that guides the wretched refuse of the Earth to America...Instrumental in opening America up to mass immigration in the little debated 1965 Immigration Reform Act pushed by Emmanuel Cellar, Bella Abzug, Jacob Javits, and Ted Kennedy. Efforts by their US organs like the Soros Foundation "Open Society", the ADL, and ACLU to continually attack the pillars and foundations of Western Civ and Christianity.

The Internationalists are also attempting to subjugate the US Constitution to "higher international law" as done by Justices Ginsburg, Kennedy, and Breyer repeatedly citing the UN CHarter and "how the US Constitution disagrees with more modern Zimbabwe and EU constitutions" - as reasons to reverse earlier court rulings and come out in favor anti-death penalty and gay freedoms rulings.

So with immigration, as you rail against the corporate greed driving the illegal immigration to concentrate wealth in the hands of a few, and their bribed Republicans...don't forget the American ideological idiots on the Left manipulated by International Jews, Euroweenie Lefties, etc. into brainless mantras like "We are all immigrants" "Give me all of Emma Lazarus's "poor, tired, and unwashed", "Most people of the Religion of Peace just want to be red-blooded Americans", "Building 4,200,000 miles of highway in America is easy, but building a 700 mile fence is beyond our technical or financial capabilities".

Posted by: Chris Ford | April 2, 2006 12:15 PM

I'm not saying that what you're suggesting is wrong, or not effective, but...


the "polls," ads if you will are saying that _Americans_ don't object to "illegals."


if someone comes up to you and asks you how you feel about granting "amnesty" to illegal workers, and you're white collar, are you going to say that you're against


"amnesty"


when Amnesty International has been using the word for years to mean supporting those interested in democracy, human rights and what not?


the only people that are _deeply_ interested about this issue is the illegals, their families, people waiting to sneak in, and those affected most directly and obviously by them...

a lot of those affected directly don't know that they are, that is part of what this blog is about...


once legislation is passed, it's a little too late

Posted by: an additional thing borg, | April 2, 2006 12:18 PM

Borg-

Why do you hate the blue collar worker? What did he do to merit his wages being cut by 10%? Why should his property taxes increase by 30% because 1) population levels that have skyrocketed because of illegal immigrigration has made land so valuable and 2) the counties need his taxes to pay for the increase in services provided to these illegals? Why should the quality of his schools plummet because they are overcrowded with students who can't speak English? Is it because he was a fool and trusted his government to enforce the laws that should have protected him? What do you suggest he do? Bend over, grab his ankles, and take it like a man?

Posted by: wiccan | April 2, 2006 12:26 PM

u idiots are freacking racist retards!!!!!!

Posted by: ME | April 2, 2006 12:29 PM

ME-

This is a debate. Prove your point. Convince me with reason that the only reason to oppose illegal immigration is racism. Are those who immigrated legally and oppose illegal immigration racists too?

Posted by: | April 2, 2006 12:35 PM

HATE USA, HATE AMERICANS, AND FUCKING HATE U GUYS FUCKING RACIST PEOPLE!!!

HAHAHA I LAUGHED SO MUCH WHEN THE TWIN TOWERS COLLAPSED!,,, AND YEAH... KATRINA DID WHAT IT CUD, EH? LOL!

Posted by: ME | April 2, 2006 12:36 PM

Oh, I see. It's audio-visual time at the sanitarium. Blessed be, ME.

Posted by: wiccan | April 2, 2006 12:44 PM

that you are trying to incite hatred towards middle eastern people...

what's that about? are you a white supremacist? with significant brain damage?

it would appear so...you've certainly not been able to engage in conversation beyond your syphillitic ravings...you're in the tertiary stage of the disease?

.

Posted by: It would appear mr ME... | April 2, 2006 12:48 PM

Who's the retard? You believe Katrina was an act of some higher power? Who's the f'n retard? Ha Ha Ha

Posted by: johnnyg in NE DC | April 2, 2006 12:49 PM

Hey guys, lighten up. It's not nice to rile the insane.

Posted by: wiccan | April 2, 2006 12:53 PM

...well, so far after a week of debating this, I'm convinced:

amnesty of any sort is a bad idea

joining up with Mexico is a bad idea

even the guest worker program is a bad idea.


People are not obeying the law as it is, making it more lenient will only make things worse. Immigrants will still want to come here illegally because they can earn a lot more here than they can in South America or Africa or Asia -plus it's a lot safer here. People will still want to hire illegals for low wages, illegally.

None of these changes will improve the system...they will just accelerate the problem.


Our own government has abandoned the principles of law and order and responsible governance. Let's go to Europe, where they have effective immigration control, and reasonable fiscal policies.

Posted by: common cents | April 2, 2006 01:46 PM

They wont let us in! LOL

Posted by: | April 2, 2006 01:49 PM

The immigration "debate" is a smoke screen designed by the Republicans to once again drive a wedge among Americans, whip up hatred, fear, and hysteria, and collect votes. Immigration is the gay marriage of this electoral season.

It should be pretty obvious by now that Republicans use scapegoating certain groups (gays, immigrants, etc...) as an electoral device.

Instead of getting all hysterical about a few million illegal immigrants, people would be better served questioning the spiraling deficits caused by this administration's reckless fiscal policies, the astronomical cost of a war of choice, the cronyism and abysmal incompetence that pervade the Administration and key agencies, and the corruption evident among memebers of Congress. These issues are the ones driving the country steadily towards a precipice.

Posted by: Devil's Advocate | April 2, 2006 01:57 PM

common cents wrote:

"Let's go to Europe, where they have effective immigration control, and reasonable fiscal policies.""
____________

I was with you up to this last sentence in your post. Europe is more threatened by immigration and lack of assimilation plus dissolution of national culture (following formation of EU) than even the U.S. Read Oriana Fallaci to get the story.

The serious problem, looking ahead to our responsibility for the rising generation, is that there is no better nation than the U.S. on these issues if you screen them to pick ones that has critical mass necessary to sustain an independent nationhood. Oddly enough, if Russia gets some fundamentals on track, it could become quite attractive. There is no visible option; we have got to get it right, here.

Posted by: On the plantation | April 2, 2006 02:02 PM

you're preaching to the choir

but it's not republicans or democrats,

it is the monied.

there is little difference between the two parties, as to what they vote for or the effect on the voters, citizens...


which is that the money, power and ability to affect our destinies is moving out of the hands of the people...


and into the hands of the international elite, that uses nations as they see fit...


citizens don't matter to this group, and they're invisible to people that keep talking about "parties"

it's not a party issue, Kerry gave the election to bush...what did he get out of the deal?

I don't know, but I know what I saw.

cronyism

is a symptom of "who's watching us?"


I mean Halliburton and Cheyney?

Cheyney supports a known felon publically, Tom Delay, Cunningham are all linked with each other...

Abramoff, visited the president several times, how does bush handle that, I can't give you the pictures it's a matter of National Security!

How does bush handle the immigration issue, bring 'em on, I need some cheaper ranch hands....he _ignores_ the matter of National Security of being able to maintain the country fiscally or providing services to our existing citizens...

witness the Katrina response, hiring the President of the ARAB_ian Horse Society to head our FEMA: Federal Emergency Management Agency

and brownie did a heckuva job!!!

I wonder if he knows those United ARAB Emirates guys or the Saudi ARABian guys or sells horses or buys them from those guys, suppose bush has ever received an ARABian stallion as a gift from those guys?


Don't get me wrong, cronyism can also be international, you could even say tribal


like having over so many billion allows you to belong to this "special" tribe.

ps. you don't belong and neither do the citizens of the United States.

.

Posted by: dear devils advocate... | April 2, 2006 02:41 PM

addressing corruption _in general_

the whole illegal alien thing is about _corruption_

the hiring of illegals, is illegal, how about making it a felony to hire _first_ time, if it can be proven that it is _with_ knowledge?


why should someone be able to beat _you_ out of a job because he has an illegal crew?


I mean, think about it....next step is an architect-builder/international hiring an entire crew from Mexico, bus them in, work the job, pay them 1/3 what you'd pay locals, charge 4/5 and pocket the rest...

that's what the future holds on all levels, for all positions


in a sense that _is_ what outsourcing is.


ask your computer professional, how they feel about outsourcing


corruption is the rotting of an ideal as well as the country


almost all of our customer service has been moved out of country...

CAPITOL ONE, the one running all of the Credit Card ADS, big_money on television,

used to have CUSTOMER SERVICE OFFICES IN Fredericksburg Virginia....employed 3,000 people...no commuter traffic there

layed off all 3,000 and moved operations to Bangalore, INDIA

are they an american company, or do they just want AMERICAN MONEY?

why should they be treated as_if they were American?

do they hire Americans?

why not?

so they can afford to run cute television ads about unemployed Vikings? maybe they're making fun of the citizens of the United States.

Posted by: you would be better served by | April 2, 2006 02:53 PM

the president and his people offering to sell you the antidote to their poisoning the water hole...

it's not an antidote, it's the next step to owning everything that you do without paying you for it.

Posted by: what you're witnessing is someone | April 2, 2006 03:35 PM

sending 12 million people home that have experienced a different world...


with no hope of living in that world unless,

_they_ create it.


send 'em home.

.

Posted by: you know what would make Mexico a better place to live? | April 2, 2006 04:17 PM

you would be better serve by writes:

"the whole illegal alien thing is about _corruption_"
______________

To be more specific, the whole thing is about globalist ambition to destroy democracy in America.

Ordinary Americans, after paying the total price of cold war victory (which worked out nicely for government by the few in America, and also in oligarchic Russia) are no longer valued as more than a disposable commodity; and are collectively shoved onto a downhill incline with illegal aliens put in the passenger seat.

It's good to think of the bell curve. More people are average than outliers. When a productive society no longer can offer a reasonable degree of security for each average person playing by the rules, along with the opportunity to experience good things in life, something is being inhumanly distorted. Until we can bravely address the deteriorating condition of the ordinary person in our society without confusion (including core issues about our identity, which is American by accumulated achievement, not simply earthling and world-court subject), we are morally and politically lost in setting a proper direction.

Taking back democracy begins with discussions to enlarge the circle, as happened on this blog in some small way. It is really interesting to watch this debate come to a consensus.

Posted by: On the plantation | April 2, 2006 05:02 PM

liberal against immigration writes:

"Already the southwest and west are running out of water, fighting over water rights. The electricity grid is overtaxed, with rolling brownouts and blackouts predicted to be a regular occurence starting in 2008 along the entire west coast service area. (we have been getting just a taste of this in the last few years) The electrical grids for the entire country are antiquated and overtaxed by a swelling population of users and construction unforeseen when they were constructed years ago."

The national infastructure plan for interstate highways, schools to accomodate the baby boom, zoning, school structures, electric transmission, and dam construction was done in the 1950s, back when we had 170 million Americans. No one could have imagined the Open Borders scheme the NYC Jews and other idealistic liberals slipped by Congress, nor the love of the wealthy Republican elite for cheap illegal labor to exploit.

The population explosion caused by unchecked immigration has now outstripped the national infastructure and along with all our other federal deficit-producing expenses, we must now contemplate paying for a massive second round of investment. Our infastructure was orginally designed to accomodate and last for the 280 million Americans by 2025, but thanks to the 3rd World hispanic and Asian hordes pouring over our Borders, that will be 363 million by 2030. And, not only will additional capacity have to be paid by all of us - there is no way to avoid the massive transportation gridlock, water resources rationing, and electric brownouts and blackouts. Host communities for imigrants are already being told by the courts they must build new schools and eliminate spillover mobile trailer use.

What isn't able to be created is more land and water. America is projected to import more food than we produce soon, due to loss of arable land and cheap irrigation water as both barrios spread and sprawl as residents seek to flee immigrant-choked regions and build elsewhere - and as water is worth more going to exploding cities shower and toilets than in continuing California and Arizona orange groves..

The population surge has taxed recreational resources, too. The black and hispanic gangs in LA fight over court time and park use. Beaches are contested.

Finally, the explosion of America's population from 140 million during WWII to 300 million today to 363 million in 2030 and between 420-450 million by 2050 makes all the pro-immigrant liberals demands that we abide by Kyoto to get below 1990 fuel use completely laughable. Same with all the ill-informed drivel about "driving the Saudis" to their knees if we abandon using SUVs. We use far less energy per person than we did in 1970, but energy use is up 35% nationally because of our immigrant exploding population. 107 Quads needed in 2004, and we will need 127 in 2030, even with conservation and the over-hyped "alternate energy sources".

Posted by: Chris Ford | April 2, 2006 05:42 PM

Seems like we have enough blame to go around.

Right and left.

However we can agree that the borders need to be closed to illegal aliens.

Posted by: Richard Katz | April 2, 2006 05:54 PM

chris ford wrote:

"No one could have imagined the Open Borders scheme the NYC Jews and other idealistic liberals . . ."

__________

Let's be nice, and accurate, at the same time. No conflict in those objectives.

It's not about a cultural group, indeed, virtually all of NYC might be for open borders. What a surprise. Hey, they don't live on a land border or in the expanding surburbs. They are already built out.

As to idealism, that's not even a remote factor in the issue of open borders. The issue or illegal and excessive immigration is about as crass as any in political history.

Steps taken to normalize the freaks (thinking of tree huggers and population control folks in that vein) might be part of the political calculus. With all respect for their long-spoken legacy voices on issues we are awakening to, we are at a point where the impacts are no longer conceptual speculation.

Either America defends her borders, in every sense including security threats and importation of poverty contributing to environmental degradation, or we die. Really that simple.

What is nowhere on the screen is leadership. Something about the political process is amiss. If it does not get corrected, we will end up being less than a nation. (Abraham Lincoln type event.) After another misconception and failure in leadership, it's every person for themselves.

Posted by: On the plantation | April 2, 2006 06:05 PM

http://stoptheinvasion.blogspot.com/

The following are three examples following the logic (or lack thereof) of our illegal immigration policies and applying it to other aspects of society.

Wet-Foot/Dry-Foot
If a Cuban refugee tries to come to America via boat and the US Coast Guard stops them while in route, they are sent back to Cuba. Yet if they are able to reach US soil (dry foot), they are allowed to stay in the US and apply for citizenship.

Following that logic, if a car thief is pulled over by the police during his getaway, he is arrested and sent to prison. Yet if the thief is able to make it to the chop shop before getting caught, no charges will be brought against him and he can even qualify for a tax deduction on the car!

Day Laborer Sites
Cities from Los Angeles to Herndon, VA have day laborers flocking to 7 Elevens and Home Depots in search of work, yet often harass women, urinate in public, and become public nuisances. Local officials have used taxpayers' money to build day laborer sites to keep them off the streets and facilitate their employment (even if it is illegal to hire illegal aliens).

Following that logic, if prostitution becomes a problem in Herndon, and ladies of the night flock to every major street corner, will the Mayor and town council build brothels to keep them off the streets?

Amnesty/Guest Worker Programs
The Senate and President are hammering out plans to grant over 12 million illegal aliens amnesty or a more PC term, guest worker program. They do jobs Americans don't want to, big business needs them, and we can't realistically deport all 12 million of them.

Following that logic, if the Senate wants to get tough on the drug problem in America, all known drug dealers already operating in the US will be granted amnesty, and allowed to continue to sell drugs so long as they get a drug dealer ID card. But that's it, we mean it! The next person that tries to sell drugs on our streets will be severely punished!

Mass illegal immigration is clearly the #1 threat to the future of the United States. More than terrorism, national debt, or hurricanes combined. Opposing mass illegal immigration is not being racist or anti-immigrant. Leaders from both parties in the Senate (when not calling each other names) are debating how much amnesty to grant the 12 million illegal aliens in the country. All these proposed bills will not only legalize 12 million people who broke our laws, but incentivize millions more to come here in hopes of a better life. We cannot afford to assume this burden any longer.

Mass illegal immigration has cost the US more in the past five years than the Iraq war.

The US population will double this century, solely because of mass illegal immigration.

We must demand from Congress:
Enforcement first!
No amnesty!
No guest worker program!

http://stoptheinvasion.blogspot.com/

Posted by: VA Patriot | April 2, 2006 06:27 PM

Ok, for all those who think a guest worker program is the only viable solution, answer me this:

1. What's the difference between a guest worker program and amnesty?
2. A year from now, what's the difference between a guest worker and a new illegal alien?
3. If illegal aliens decide not to take the steps to become citizens, what difference does that make?
4. Since each illegal alien added to this country increases a financial burden to the taxpayers, while companies who hire them get cheap labor, why do taxpayers want more illegal aliens.
5. If illegal immigration is a critical problem (generally agreed), how will granting guest worker amnesty resolve the situation?
6. If Congress and the President authorize a massive guest worker program, do you think future illegal immigration will decrease, remain the same (1 million per year), or increase?
7. Do you think America can survive with a dual society?
8. Se habla Espanol? Push 2 for Engrish.
9. Would you put your kids in a school with significant numbers of illegal alien children or anchor babies?
10. Do you think it's worth protecting our ports if 1 million people with less than an 8th grade education can sneak across the border.

http://stoptheinvasion.blogspot.com/

Posted by: VA Patriot | April 2, 2006 06:34 PM

"Oddly enough, if Russia gets some fundamentals on track, it could become quite attractive. There is no visible option; we have got to get it right, here. "


...but we're not going to get it right, here.

Latest trends show that the greencard and "eventual citizenship" have 78% support among Americans, almost nobody favors deportation.

...shame, seeing how it is the law, really.

...I wonder if that is why they are still here...

Well! Congress has seen the nation thumb its nose at the law for years, and now, Congress is responding by watering down the law.

I just have one question.

How are the liberals on this issue, actually going to make these things happen?

Is it suddenly going to become legal to hire all these illegals? And then who is going to work temp jobs for low wages?

Are they just going to say, "hey, come out, and apply for citizenship! We want you to do it!"

And then who is going to lose their sponsorship or their visa slot, that is waiting in line right now to get a visa?

Just in case that a lot of these people are Hispanics, which country is going to lose their visa slots because Hispanics are already overrepresented? Imagine, 12 million new citizens, virtually overnight! -o.k. they may not be Immediate citizens, but they are still in the pipeline, right? so that's 12 million new visa apps that must be processed. Where will there be room for new ones?

Last question: suppose they change the rules, without deporting those who have snuck in already, or those who are already overstaying their visas. How is anyone supposed to take them seriously?

They won't work
they're not even plausible

and who really cares, if they are already here illegally and now they know they won't be deported or incarcerated?

...it really seems to me that EVENTUALLY even pro-illegal immigrants are going to realize that we HAVE TO ENFORCE CURRENT LAW for ANY future immigration law to work.

now let's see what happens.

yep, "put 'em at the end of the line" oh, they're already here!!!

yep, "it's not 'amnesty'" we're just not punishing them for breaking the law :)
In fact if they actually "qualify", we're going to grant them citizenship. Even if they don't seem to need it, or care very much about it ;)

Posted by: cc | April 2, 2006 06:42 PM

"Guest worker" is such a misnomer. Consult the dictionary. They are not invited into our homes, or to cross our borders.

If we need a mental model for positioning alien temporary labor in the workforce, make it a contract model, not a hospitality one. They check in, they check out, they receive the corpus of their payment only after they checkout.

Posted by: On the plantation | April 2, 2006 06:45 PM

Considering what I heard on the Sunday talk shows, our elected representatives seem very concerned about the "feelings" of our illegal aliens.

They don't want to commit political suicide.

Ok, this should be fun to watch.

Posted by: Richard Katz | April 2, 2006 07:43 PM

K Cleary - "Wouldn't offering Mexico statehood (either as a number of states, or as one big state) be more realistic than building a stupid wall around our country?"

Yea, as soon as we finish making Iraq the 51st state, Afganistan the 52nd, then Mexico the 53rd.

Posted by: K Cloudy | April 2, 2006 09:28 PM

every one wants to run away from a harsh life. They think they will be better in the usa. They might be right or they might be wrong.....dead wrong

Posted by: Dr.Q | April 2, 2006 11:14 PM

Borg-

Why do you hate the blue collar worker?

Posted by: wiccan | Apr 2, 2006 12:26:29 PM

wiccan,

Why do you put words in my mouth, er blog? Why do you hate yourself, that is if you are one of the blue collar workers? You voted for this man twice did you not? The most blue blood of the blue blood presidents yes? You thought he was one of you because he speaks with a Texas drawl? And you still don't know the politicians in DC survive on lobbyists' dole outs? Who do you think they listen to at roll calls?

Listen up you are Americans, you can either vote with your ballots on election day which comes every two or four years. Or you can vote with your dollar every day, sort of putting your money where your blog is. You rail against businesses employing illegals while continuing spending your money at the very same businesses. Don't blame anybody else first. We live in a capitalist world where supply requires demand. Or do you really buy into that supply side economics baloney?

The Latino DJs put half a million of their people on the streets of LA. Louis Farrakhan put together his million men march. If you are so concerned, put toghether a three million blue collar workers march in DC and maybe you will get the pols' attention.

But if all you do is rail on this blog and talk incessantly about mining the border, or dumping part of the Statue of Liberty into NY harbor, or spew obscenities about 'anchor baby being spit out' (Mr. Ford was that how your mother brought you into this world, spitting you out from her mouth? And what is your claim to this land that makes you so self rightous and cocksure? Being spit out from the womb of a US female citizen? Or your name is of Anglo origin?), the rest of America, even the politicians, are justified in viewing you as nothing but a bunch of whining xenophobic lunatic fringes.

America is a diverse nation with many competing interests and the issue is a complex one with many sides. To insist that it's either your way or the high way is not the way to solve this problem.

Get real.

Posted by: Borg | April 3, 2006 12:19 AM

"Illegals should never demand or claim it's a right to be a US citizen. Only law obeying immigrants are welcomed."

Of course it's not a right to become a U.S. citizen. They may, however, demand whatever they want. It's up to people making decisions to give sensible answers (like "no").

"The US can't take in the world and expect to continue to tbe the USA. It'll become a Balkanized state, with petty rivalries among ethnic groups that REFUSE to assimilate."

Newsflash, the U.S. has already taken in the world. It's taken in all of my ancestors dating from the 1700s to the 1900s and yours too unless you're an Amerindian. I don't know about yours, but my first generation ancestors, like countless others, lived in ethnic neighborhoods, spoke their native languages, and let their kids do the assimilating. The only difference, which seems to distress you, is that it's still happening, after your anteceedants have already assimilated. I'll keep an eye out for warring immigrant ethnic groups that have crept across our Mexican border, but I don't have high hopes for seeing any. Sorry to disappoint.

"We don't need what happened in France here. And we don't need the BS interference of the Muslims in Holland (which one radical murdered a relative of that art master Vincent Van Gogh, right in the street and stuck his treatise with a knife in his chest!). >:("

We already have radicals living here. I lived 30 miles from where the 9/11 hijackers bragged in a Daytona Beach bar that "something big" was going to happen. Not that the vast majority of our illegal immigrants are Muslim radicals. They're poor Latinos, not noted for caring about Van Gogh or his descendants. And what happened in France will never happen here for two reasons 1. we don't have France's draconian labor laws, which make their situation totally different from ours, and 2. Americans are way too apathetic to take to the streets to protest injustice, real or percieved.

"If immigrants don't assimilate, if they break the law first then demand all the perks of citizenship without the work -- NO, we don't need them and they best pack up and go home."

So if they come here legally, become citizens, work, BUT maintain their native culture, they should be tossed out? Curse those Cinco de Mayo partys--all U.S. citizen guests, return to your country of birth at once!

Honestly, people have such an unnuanced view of the situation. Consider the actual typical Latino immigrant: Christian (often Catholic), devout, family-oriented, spends more as a percent of income on children's toys than the average American white, likely to support traditional/conservative values. That they don't all speak English is the biggest black mark against them when people talk beyond the fact that, obviously, they are here illegally. In fact, it often seems their puported lack of assimilation is more important then the legality of their presence. Like we're a homogoneous culture to begin with--visit inner city projects, a small town in the south, the affluent suburbs of a northeastern city--just tell me we're all the same and assimilated into a Unity Culture.

On the other hand--do illegal immigrants take jobs Americans "don't want to do"? No, they take wages that are too low for Americans to accept, and they keep those wages low. And that's why the Administration wants to establish them with a guest worker program. Because it's a gift to big business.

On still another hand, can we expect to deport 12 million people as though they were all the same? No. Physically, it can't be done. Limited amnesty for long-time illegal residents linked to reparations (back taxes) and proof of gainful employment makes sense. Mass amnesty as a prelude to creating a permanent non-citizen low-wage workforce to benefit corporate giants at the expense of American workers? No.

How to stem the tide of illegal immigration? Enforce existing laws punishing companies for hiring illegal immigrants. Once there is no substantial job market for them, they will stop coming. Want to hurry the process along? Pressure Mexico with aid incentives to change its policies that create such poverty and encourage illegal immigration.

And, I recommend simpy being thankful that you are not asking yourself if it's worth breaking immigration laws in order to support yourself or your family.

Posted by: Froggy01 | April 3, 2006 12:27 AM

The immigration Problem has to be viewed in two parts:
1)What do we do for the FUTURE, and
2 What do we do NOW

1) The future flow of illegal immigrants nust be stiopped. No problem can be solved with open borders. The most effective, permanent solution to the border security is to built a barrier of some kind, which ieffective in stopping 95% of the attempted entries. With the illiegal flow stopped, we can coinsider what to do with
the existing 11+ Millions of illegal aliens in the USA. Most of them are hard working people who perform hard work for little money that someone one wants done, so we all benefit from it. There are a couple of things that need to be done, but ONLY if the part 2) Fut

Posted by: Novas | April 3, 2006 04:48 AM

Plantation - America was opened up to massive 3rd World migration by the 1965 Immigration Reform Act. Take some time someday to look at who masterminded that act (Emmanuel Cellar of NYC & Friends), how they used Holocaust Guilt over the St Louis and the Emma Lazarus myth to get their way. Even after the floods came in, it took awhile for Rupblican fatcats to join the bigbucks Democratic donors in promoting illegal immigration....but once the fatcats realized the riches they could amass by lowering wages nation-wide in industry and agribiz with no fear of arrest or fines for employing illegals, getting rid of troublesome black employees - there was no stopping the Republican fatcats from linking arms in common cause with the Multi-Culti mavens of a Diverse and more "Like the UN Itself", America.

cc - Mickey Kaus of Slate deconstructed the Time Magazine poll as completely bogus, asking the most slanted, dishonest poll questions he has ever encountered. Something any newpaper that seized on poll results indicating - contrary to all previous polls - that America suddenly favored keeping all illegals in America - obviously failed to do.

Borg - The Emma Lazarus plaque is not part of the Statue of Liberty. It was added to it in 1905 by a wealthy society matron in return for a donation. As for "anchor babies", we are now the last advanced nation that values our citizenship so cheaply that we alone give "Jus Solis" birthright citizenship to reward criminal acts. Ireland and New Zealand, in 2004 and 2006, were the final two nations in the Anglosphere to revoke "Jus Solis" after they became the targets of organized Nigerian, Chinese, and Muslim gangs ferrying in pregnant women to spit out anchor babies then stay permanently on the dole and repay the gangs.

Froggy01 - "On still another hand, can we expect to deport 12 million people as though they were all the same? No. Physically, it can't be done."

That is the mantra of people that say while it is possible for 12 million to walk in, it is physically impossible for 12 million to walk out. Obviously, if it is physically possible to go in one direction, it is physically possible to go in the other direction. That is similar to the mantra that a secure border fence is physically impossible to construct and far too expensive for any nation to do....Which ignores that India secures it's Paki Muslim flank with 2,000 miles of fences and mines, and was able to slap up a 1200 mile long lethal voltage electric fence to keep desperate Bangladeshis from flooding in, taking Indian jobs, and depressing wages. If the world's largest democracy can do it, we can too. Especially since America had no difficulty with far more expensive and extensive and technically challenging public works projects, even 200 years ago when we made over 2,000 miles of canals and locks, then did 4,000 miles of railroad inc. bridges and blasted mountains in 30 years, and recently 42,000 miles of multi-lane super highways.

A 1600 mile electrified fence with high tech sensors and border guards authorized to use weapons on attackers, and to deport immediately with no ACLU lawyer intervention - would be a piece of cake if the American publc can triumph over the Ruling Elite's obstinance. And while we may not go their for aesthetic reasons, marked minefields have proven to be a tremendously effective, low cost barrier system in other areas of the world that deters trespassers. And causes no casualties other than to terrorists and armed soldiers who alone enter and try and defeat a marked minefield to cross it. In 30 years of existance - Thai, Vietnamese, Indian, Czech minefields guarding their borders produced no inadvertent civilian casualties.

Posted by: Chris Ford | April 3, 2006 06:31 AM

I will tell you what I have seen these last few days I saw two distinct demonstrations on two continents some here in the United States and some in France. I saw burning cars in France but none hear in the United States.

In the demonstrations here in the United States I too saw our beloved "Stars and Stripes flag, the flag from Mexico and some flags from other countries. I saw children, parents and grand parents together in solidarity, my people the working class, they may not be sophisticated but they got the message heard. I saw the flags being a sign of solidarity as when I see German flags flying during October Fest and Ireland Flags flying during St. Patrick's Day.

From publish reports the demonstrations included both US citizens and those without legal residency. This brought me a smile because I always enjoy seeing brothers helping brothers.

This reminds me of a parable from the good book where a Levite and Priest come upon a man who fell among thieves and they both individually passed by and didn't stop to help him. Finally a man of another race came by, he got down from his beast, decided not to be compassionate by proxy and got down with the injured man, administered first aid, and helped the man in need. Jesus ended up saying, this was the good man, this was the great man, because he had the capacity to project the "I" into the "thou," and to be concerned about his brother.

You see, the Levite and the Priest were afraid, they asked themselves, "If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me?"

But then the Good Samaritan came by. And he reversed the question: "If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?"

That's the question before us. The question is not, "If I stop to help the non-documented workers in need, what will happen to me?" The question is, "If I do not stop to help the non-documented workers, what will happen to him or her?" That's the question.

God bless all my brothers and sister that stood side by side with our brothers and sisters in need. I know God will not discriminate by country of origin as men do.

Posted by: Benito Juarez | April 3, 2006 12:44 PM

A letter from Maria - My name is Maria

A Congressman employs me. His wife is a lobbyist for the Agricultural and the Hotel Industries.

My job is to clean house, cook meals, nanny the children, to take them to school and doctor's appointments, wash them and put them to bed at night and to fill other jobs requests they ask me to do.

My hours are very long since my employers work long hours and have to go to many parties they say they have attend for the good of the nation.

Sometimes, I have to push the Congressman hands away when I am in the kitchen and sometimes his wife accuses me of stealing her bras and panties when she cannot find them.

I am an illegal so they pay me in cash because the Congressman tells me that it saves a lot of unnecessary paper work.

When I applied for the job, I told them I was from Guatemala and they said that was great since they wanted their kids to experience some cultural diversity. No one asked me for a Social Security Card, I was glad of that since I did not get the last job I applied for because of that.

I learn about his job from my brother Juan who has been doing some remodeling of the townhouse owned by the Congressman. I overhead them saying that Juan was saving them thousands of dollars in remodeling costs because he works so cheap.

I want to become an American citizen but I see on TV that some people do not want that and I do not know why since I would not be here doing all this work if people like this family did not want me.

I wonder if I get the permit they talk about if they will raise my salary?

Well that my story for now so have a good day.
Maria

Posted by: camus | April 3, 2006 01:00 PM

France does not automatically confer French nationality on children born on its territory. If neither of its parents is French, the child must attend school in France between the ages of eleven and fifteen, and may request French nationality at the age of sixteen. Children born in France of foreign parents used to automatically acquire French nationality at birth; this changed in 1993 with the entry into force of the "Loi Pasqua", a legislative act crafted by right-wing politician Charles Pasqua.

Posted by: mads | April 3, 2006 02:24 PM

thanks so much for sharing your concocted tale of what it is like to be an illegal...


I think the focus should be on making those that _hire_ illegals into criminals, felony criminals...


I think congress people should be _less_ exempt from getting away from commiting crimes...


the reason congress people should be not at all exempt from being prosecuted for crimes, _any_ crimes is that they handle laws...


how can we be assured that the congress people are acting in _our_ best interests IF they don't adhere to the laws that they pass...


I think it's time to arrest a few congress people.


I like the idea that Rudy Guilliani had in New York City, they were knee deep in murder, flagrant robbery, rape, assault, and so on...New York City was a CRIME CAPITAL....


then he pressed the New York City Cops to arrest anyone commiting a crime, scofflaws, subway vandals, what-have-you...


turns out crime went to zero.


the reason being, the people that think nothing about

not paying for lunch
not paying a parking ticket
not reporting honestly on their taxes
hiring illegals
shop lifting
not paying for a subway pass/jumping the turnstile

were the same ones murdering, raping, assaulting and what not


if you arrest congress people for their daily inability to simply follow the law of the land, then you won't be troubled by the ones that they are passing to

rape you of your rights as a citizen.


prosecute fully for hiring illegals...

.

thanks so much.

good luck and good night.

.

Posted by: Alexandria Virgina...hello... | April 3, 2006 02:28 PM

Benito,
"I saw the flags being a sign of solidarity as when I see German flags flying during October Fest and Ireland Flags flying during St. Patrick's Day"

Interesting solidarity. In two cases, the flags are flown in celebration as part of a holiday and drinking ritual, supposedely never higher than the US flag. In the other, the flag is flown in celebration of breaking American law, in some cases flown higher than or replacing the US flag. In the two cases, the flags are shown as celebrating the countries where the 'customs' are from. In the other, the flags were flown in defiance of American law, placing mexican heritage, rights, and laws over that of American.

So how are these linked, other than that they fly flags?

Posted by: Geb | April 3, 2006 03:07 PM

Froggy01, we don't have to round up and deport 12 million illegals.

All we have to do is make it economically, politically and personally preferable for them to leave the country.

Just like it has been for years, for them to come here.

And they will go. Out. Richer, older and wiser.

And if they don't, fine: they stayed here so long and got so fat old slow lazy and complacent that the law caught up to them, and, c'est la vie, as they say in Mexico City.

The alternative is to do nothing and not change the system, or, make it even *more* attractive for them to come here illegally, and stay and work.

And notice how many are saying "ok. build a wall (now that I am already inside), but it would be cruel to deport us. Give us citizenship and let us live like normal human beings instead of on the run like animals". But they have done that for years, by choice, so how bad can life as an illegal be?

Must be a hell of a lot better than life where they came from, hm?

Posted by: cc | April 3, 2006 07:20 PM

Hey, I'm not content with the immigration situation as it is either. I don't think that anyone should have to enter this country illegally--mainly because over 2,000 illegal migrants have died in the AZ desert since 1996 (since being pushed out of urban crossing areas by US policy). But there are several important things that you all need to realize.

First, border security has never worked. It is costly, inefficient and inhumane. People continue to migrate, even when they have to pay a coyote 3000$ to get them across or walk four days in the desert.

Second, there really is not a good reason why the US govt would ever pass border security. The govt is in a tight bind. On one hand, it has the obligation to support big business, which often relies on foreign or illegal alien labor. It also has to maintain the political relationship with Mexico. On the other hand, it needs to provide citizens with an image of 'security' on the border and protection from foreign competition for jobs(which doesn't really exist).

Thirdly, it really depends on the math whether illegal immigrants actually do use more social services than pay in taxes. Most do have fake Soc Sec #s because the 1996 legislation penalizes employers who "knowingly" hire illegal aliens. As a result, employers demand that the migrant present ID, even if they know it is fake. That means at least 80% of illegal aliens ARE paying into the social security system (Mexican Migration Project). And guess what, they are never going to get a return on that when they retire.
Also, once you include sales tax, car tax, etc., that net amount of taxes is even larger. The social services that immigrants most use is education because they have more kids. How are they supposed to assimilate if they are denied access to education? Very few migrants come here to get on welfare. They probably don't even know about it, and it would be shameful anyhow, because they came here to work. In AZ, healthcare officials have confirmed that lower class white families without health insurance are the biggest drain on the healthcare system. Illegal immigrants pay their healthcare bills much more often. Finally, even if undocumented aliens did pay income tax,the great majority would have the entire tax returned because they are making too little to be taxed. Thus, even if they were legalized, there wouldn't be a significantly greater amount of taxes being paid into the system by them. In fact, they may pay LESS taxes because they would apply for tax returns.

Fourthly, nationalism is just as silly as racism. Both are identifications we put on that are always based on "us" and "them," "out" and "in," and, often as a result, "good" and "bad" or "greater" and "lesser." The 'difference' is minor (6% of genes are different between 'races'; jump over a superficially imposed border and you're there). See point below:

Fifthly, we need to recognize more than anything the structures in place that create migration in the first place. Surprise, surprise, one of them is US policy itself. As the US promotes the neoliberal economic agenda in Latin America as the solution to their economic woes, in actuality, the gap between the poor and rich is getting larger as a result. Mexico has wholeheartedly embraced that agenda, because how could it do otherwise? The US has always been Mexico's largest trading partner. That means that agricultural workers are being pushed out of work because subsidized US agricultural products are cheaper than the Mexican-produced alternatives, which are not allowed to be subsidized under neoliberal policy (i.e. NAFTA). That means that agricultural workers aren't able to make ends meet and have to seek other modes of employment. It'd be nice to say "well that's you're problem, Mexico" (i.e. the nationalistic response). But that's not the way it works because also part of the policy, not covered by NAFTA, but still emphasized by the US govt is the reduction of government involvement in the economy. That means Mexican corn farmers can't appeal to the gov't for subsidies as a result of US policy. Since jobs are available here, they come to the US. The point here is that illegal immigration is at least partially a direct result of US economic policy and ignoring the ties that bind the US and Mexico together is naive. A second equally important point is that the US economy demands cheap labor to maintain its competitiveness. That can't be achieved with legal aliens, who would demand the minimum wage.

Therefore, it is at least partially the fault of US citizens and the "american way of life" that illegal aliens are here.

If anybody's being cheated in all this, it is the illegal alien. Think about it, what better population to exploit? They're not citizens, so you don't have any obligation to respect their rights. You can pay them below minimum wage, make them work overtime without pay, fire them for no reason, send them back to Mexico without pay when you don't need them anymore by calling up the INS. On top of that, the chances of them going to the police or even accessing health services are small because they always live in the fear of getting caught. I don't know what kind of 'free ride' that is, esp considering they are working and paying taxes. What you call 'special privileges' sounds a lot like 'fairness and equality' or 'freedom from abuse' in my book.

So who really profits from undocumented alien labor? Well, you do. You get cheap stuff, affordable produce, maintained buildings and roads, assembled tires for your car . . . and on and on. So stop all the whining.

Posted by: Beth | April 4, 2006 02:12 AM

Beth, you leave out the problems caused by illegals using fake SS#s. According to msn, the IRS reports approximately 9 million cases of taxes filed that have discrepencies in SS#s. In most cases of those reviewed, the result is someone using a fake SS#. This creates problems of identity fraud, baring people from using disability, welfare, etc, as the government believes they earn more money that they actually do.

And sure, they don't go to the police often, but health services and education? In the case of education, their children, whether born on US soil or not, are often gratned US citizenship. And from working in a hospital, let me tell you. Hospitals get their fair share of illegals.

Posted by: Geb | April 4, 2006 11:37 AM

Gees, i thought u guys was a lot smarter than us, apparently i thought wrong.
Did anyone concider the huge difference in avarage income between Mexico and The U.S.
If i couldnt afford to send my kids to school or let alone feed them, i'd migrate too.

Dont believe any law or wall will keep people out, if u want to prevent immigration u should concider trying to raise livingstandarts in the sending country.

Posted by: European | April 5, 2006 04:47 AM

I don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but this statement is factually inaccurate: "Like the United States, France, India, Ireland, Mexico and New Zealand all automatically confer citizenship on anyone born within their territory, regardless of the citizenship of the child's parents." France, India, Ireland, and New Zealand all have restrictions on who can claim citizenship by virtue of birth. In none of these countries do the children of illegal immigrants have a right to citizenship.

Posted by: ... | April 5, 2006 10:49 AM

SIMPLE:

Mine our side of the border to a depth of five miles. Anyone that trips a mine,
LEAVE THEM OUT THERE TO SCREAM! Border
secured in under two weeks.

Posted by: Ralph | April 5, 2006 07:42 PM

IF YOU HIRE ILLEGALS, I HOPE _THE GOVERNMENT_ DEPORTS _YOU_

I think the focus should be on making those that _hire_ illegals into criminals, felony criminals...


I think congress people should be _less_ exempt from getting away from commiting crimes...


the reason congress people should be not at all exempt from being prosecuted for crimes, _any_ crimes is that they handle laws...


how can we be assured that the congress people are acting in _our_ best interests IF they don't adhere to the laws that they pass...


I think it's time to arrest a few congress people.


I like the idea that Rudy Guilliani had in New York City, they were knee deep in murder, flagrant robbery, rape, assault, and so on...New York City was a CRIME CAPITAL....


then he pressed the New York City Cops to arrest anyone commiting a crime, scofflaws, subway vandals, what-have-you...


turns out crime went to zero.


the reason being, the people that think nothing about

not paying for lunch
not paying a parking ticket
not reporting honestly on their taxes
hiring illegals
shop lifting
not paying for a subway pass/jumping the turnstile

were the same ones murdering, raping, assaulting and what not


if you arrest congress people for their daily inability to simply follow the law of the land, then you won't be troubled by the ones that they are passing to

rape you of your rights as a citizen.


prosecute fully for hiring illegals...

.

thanks so much.

good luck and good night.

.

Posted by: dear beth... | April 6, 2006 12:58 AM

To BETH, JESSE JACKSON, LA RAZA, & LULAC.

Why is it that when any white person opens
his mouth agsinst some abomination anotther race wants to cram down our throats - it's RACISM?
But Blacks can have the NAACP, The Black
Police officers association, The black Nurses association and on and on. The Latinos can have LULAC, LA RAZA (which means "The Race") and everything is just ducky. "ONLY Whites" can be racist - what BULLSHIT!!!!! Beth, you and your ilk have run this Racist thing into the ground. I'M
TIRED OF GIVING IN TO YOUR WORTHLESS ASSES!!

Posted by: Ralph | April 7, 2006 04:06 PM

One of the major problems we have in this country is a lack of respect for law,especially amongst our young people.How can our leaders expect respect and compliance, when they themselves show disrespect for our laws,by refusing to enforceing them, when it suites the purposes of their rich friends and against the common folk?Do we actually need more people in this country who feel that the laws don't really apply to them?

Posted by: Del Allegood | April 12, 2006 07:34 AM

One of the major problems we have in this country is a lack of respect for law,especially amongst our young people.How can our leaders expect respect and compliance, when they themselves show disrespect for our laws,by refusing to enforceing them, when it suites the purposes of their rich friends and against the common folk?Do we actually need more people in this country who feel that the laws don't really apply to them?Seehttp:npublici.blogspot.com

Posted by: Del Allegood | April 12, 2006 07:36 AM

One of the major problems we have in this country is a lack of respect for law,especially amongst our young people.How can our leaders expect respect and compliance, when they themselves show disrespect for our laws,by refusing to enforceing them, when it suites the purposes of their rich friends and against the common folk?Do we actually need more people in this country who feel that the laws don't really apply to them?Seehttp:npublici.blogspot.com

Posted by: Del Allegood | April 12, 2006 07:48 AM

why should we?...i think not!! go home!!!!


I WIL NOT TOLERATE THIS RACISM!!!

Posted by: bobina brown | May 1, 2006 06:31 AM

I belive that this racist piece of trash is of no significance and the creator of this site should kill him/herself.. and PLEASE think of the children.. ahehe

Posted by: John Brown | May 1, 2006 06:33 AM

i belive John brown has a very good arguement.. the children must be sacraficed in a ritual of goatly love and michael jackson.. peace out a-he-he-he

Posted by: Mike Oxbig | May 1, 2006 06:37 AM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.