Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< The ship 'em all back home thing is never, ever going to happen. It's unworkable (no pun intended). The president's plan recognizes that, and at the same time recognizes that something must be done to stop the constant unrestricted flow of people across the borders, some of whom may not be entering the country with honorable intent. It is not fair that some people who cut to the head of the line to come here illegally will benefit from this, but at this late date, little else can be done. Many people are waiting in line patiently to do the right thing and come here legally, and their wait is extended by illegal immigration. My hope is that this plan creates a fresh start and frees up resources to more closely monitor our borders from now on. >>> This touches on something I really wanted to say about this whole situation. I think many people generally support the President's plan, except for the amnesty provisions. But I have to ask them: assuming you support a guest worker program, and assuming that the US economy needs and can support X number of foreign workers, what difference does it make if these legitimized guest workers consist of the ones already here, or new ones that would be imported? It makes no difference whatever, except possibly with someone that has a point they're trying to make outside of the real world.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< The RABID-right is proposing for the police-state, enforcement-only approach (roll up the window to keep the SOUND out). More reasonable people are actually proposing a bipartisan holistic approach that will actually deal with the problem in on a larger scale (actually finding the source of the sound and repairing it). >>> It's fascinating that President Bush seemingly falls into the second category and is getting tomatoes lobbed at him from his own "base." <<< Certainly your not expecting a RATIONAL idea from the Dem camp? With all this holistic solution mumbo jumbo. >>> The holistic approach seems to be coming from the White House of all places. It's not a perfect solution, but it's by far (at least 10x) better than any other I've seen proposed by anyone. Kar2ooonMan said: <<< I'm glad someone at the Federal level, President Bush, is at least discussing the matter at long last. His plan appears to be one attempting a compromise solution, and I applaud him for it. It may not be the ideal plan for either side in this issue, but it's a start at least. From a national security and economic standpoint, it's essential that a nation be in control of its borders. That's reasonable, I think, but it'll probably have me branded xenophobic, racist or fascist within a few posts. >>> I could not have said better.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< The libs are the ones pretending that nothing is wrong and are simply rolling up the windows when the engine is on fire and their Mickey antenna topper is missing. >>> And I damned well hope they deport that illegal once they find out which one swiped it!
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< What other reason would they be having kids here? >>> Well, what if they come here to work illegally? I hate to break the news to you, but some people here illegally might actually have sex while they are here, and some of the females will probably get pregnant as a result. Not every situation is part of a grand scheme to deliver an anchor baby.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< How about begining the deportation process of illegal immigrants by sending back the illegals that comprise 20% of the US jail population. >>> Thanks to changes enacted in the past few years, this is more or less automatic now. Non-citizens that are serving time for deportable crimes (which is basically any felony or violent crime, and some others) generally have an "immigration hold" placed on them, so that when they are done serving their sentence they get turned over to INS for deportation. I'm not sure where you're coming from, but I've heard some people propose that we deport such people prior to their sentences being served in a US facility, perhaps immediately. This is a very bad idea in my opinion. Although it might save taxpayer dollars in the short run in individual cases, the message sent to potential alien criminals is that you will not have to serve the same justice in the US as citizens would. Who knows what would happen to them if they get deported back to where they came from. I doubt that other countries would agree to keep them locked up at their expensse as a standard practice, especially since our criminal justice system tends to mete out sentences far in excess of what's typical in the rest of the world for similar crimes.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< You can't send someone back when they have a child that was born in the US. >>> Perhaps drastic, but one thing you COULD do is amend the Constitution to remove automatic citizenship based on birth. The notion of automatic citizenship based on place of birth was not part of the original Constitution, but was added by the 14th Amendment as a way to make it absolutely clear that the former slaves were full citizens based solely on being born here. The need for this has passed. In concept, one thing that I would support is to make a minor change to provide that anyone born here is granted automatic citizenship at birth only if the mother is legally present (without respect to her citizenship). In practice, you'd have to deal with situations such as how do you establish the citizenship of the mother if it's not clear? (I know several people who are riled up about the current immigration situation that would have a simple answer: if they have dark skin and can't speak English, assume alien; if the have light skin and speak English, assume citizen). Would there be a burden of proof? This alone might be reason enough to make this idea impractical. Also, you'd have to provide for the situation of stateless children. For example, what if the mother was an illegal alien from XYZ Country, and that country's citizenship laws provide that you must be born in that country in order to have citizenship? Then, you'd have a baby that was stateless. Even if you deported the mother back to XYZ Country, there may be nowhere to send the child, as XYZ Country is not obligated to accept persons that are not their citizens. And I would insist that the details be embedded in the Amendment itself and not delegated to Congress or the Executive branch in order to minimize the risk that it gets monkeyed with based on the political winds of the day or some narrow group's agenda. Maybe this idea is completely unworkable, but I raise it just to say that I think the notion that every last person born in the US regardless of the circumstances is deserving of automatic citizenship is not absolute. <<< <<You can't send someone back when they have a child that was born in the US>> There is legislation in progress to change this stupid rule. >>> Can you provide the details? The child in such a situation is automatically a US Citizen per the 14th Amendment, and I think it would be a very unwise move to allow the gov't to deport US citizens, even if it were somehow constitutional. It will take more than legislation to address this.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Nonsense on both counts. Transparency of government has very little to do with the economic system in place, and much to do with an independent and free press and a general will of the public and gov't officials to root out corruption. Corrupt systems can exist in any system, as can a highly efficient and transparent gov't. Mexico's problems are far more related to corruption than socialism. It's lack of transparency in government that keeps foreign investment out.> Sure. That's why the infrastructure in Eastern Europe under the communists was better than that of Western Europe. When the government controls who builds what, rather than the free market, there's a lot more corruption, and waste.
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 A little late to this topic, but I was being a good Republican and keeping the brown people down. I actually don't blame some guy from Mexico wanting to come here. To give his family a good life. I love to visit Mexico and you'll find some of the nicest people down there. But we can't have thousands of people pouring in here. It's just too dangerous.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>When the government controls who builds what, rather than the free market, there's a lot more corruption, and waste.<< Just look at the no-bid contracts in Iraq and the waste and fraud that are pandemic there today.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh I'm not sure "pandemic" is the word to describe it, but there's no question that no-bid contracts can lead to corruption. Just look at the Oil for Food program.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <When the government controls who builds what, rather than the free market, there's a lot more corruption, and waste.> I'll remember that the next time I drive on the interstates that were privately funded... Oh, wait.
Originally Posted By Elderp <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10256189/" target="_blank">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10 256189/</a> This was hilarious
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <I'll remember that the next time I drive on the interstates that were privately funded...> Interstate work is almost always done via open bids.
Originally Posted By cmpaley But the general parameters on public works projects like the Interstate Highway System are decided by the government. In fact, there are very specific requirements on how an Interstate highway can be built such as lane width, uniform signage, striping, exit numbering and the like. Also, Interstate highways are funded by the Federal and State governments (and in some places, the local government, such as Orange County, CA with Measure M).
Originally Posted By planodisney Lets see here, I just read basically this entire thread, and so far, cmpaley and TomSawyer have called conservatives on here, Rascists, they want to kill all people with brown skin and are terrible christians. someone please explain to me again how bush is dividing this nation and not people like this who resort, again and again, to senseless attacks and name calling of the worst kind imaginable. Congrats. to you guys who have taken these attacks without throwing back the same horrible attacks. I wouldnt expect anything more from cmpaley, but come on Tomsawyer, you are a much better person than that!!!
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>Lets see here, I just read basically this entire thread, and so far, cmpaley and TomSawyer have called conservatives on here, Rascists, they want to kill all people with brown skin and are terrible christians.<< Well, that would make sense if anyone who was a CONSERVATIVE actually posted here. There are no conservatives posting to WE on this board. Lots of people who call themselves conservatives, but no real conservatives. >>I wouldnt expect anything more from cmpaley, but come on Tomsawyer, you are a much better person than that!!!<< Um...can you say personal attack? I knew you could. I note you fail, or perhaps intentionally refuse, to speak to the issues being addressed...all so you can personally attack me? Typical.
Originally Posted By planodisney So calling someone on the carpet for horrible name calling and labelling people on this sight some of the worst things you could say about anyone, is an attack? I couldnt realy get past the horrible things you said about people in order to even consider the discussion. Your refusal to even consider that some of the things you said were terrible says volumes.
Originally Posted By planodisney to the point of this discussion, i must admit that I am torn. It is only human to feel for the immigrants who come to this country to make a better life, even if they are illegal. Also, as someone who knows, and has employed illegal immigrants, i dont know a single one who had a baby just so that they would have a foothold in the U.S. I cant speak to all situations, but it is not true in the more than 20 imigrant families I have known. But,while my heart tells me to feel sorry for and help these people, my head, and commom sense, tells me that we have to put a stop to illegal immigration. Also, there are far too many people illegally in this country that we know nothing about, to start granting amnesty. This is one of those classic issues that make liberals look like caring, loving individuals and Conservatives look like Scrooge. But, sometimes the head must win out over the heart. I am afraid that far too often, liberals wont make the correct, hard choice as in this issue. Sometimes you have to be tough, even if you will be labeled a rascist or worse. What is good for this country should always be the number 1 goal.
