PMEL Forum

This kills me. A bunch of illegal aliens and pink liberals are going to boycott a Bill in Congress. They are mad because they are refered to as felons and we are trying to kick them out. I guess the truth hurts. I am tired of paying for Rosa's 16 children and for the chicken feed for the chickens all in their yard. What really gets under my skin is when they wave that Mexican flag. If you wave a mexican flag then you're Mexican so get the hell out of my country. Does this bother anyone else? It should. :x

All of them drive around without insurance. They cost our hospitals a bunch of lost revenue which is passed on to the Health Insurance Companies and then to us in our insurance premiums. They are all criminals because they knew they were breaking the law when they swam the Rio Grande, so they don't care about our laws. The crime rate among these people is extremly high. I guess that's because they are ALL CRIMINALS.

I have no problems with people coming to this country. I JUST DON"T LIKE THE ILLEGALS.  :x

Sheriffs from counties along the U.S.-Mexico border in Texas say the daily battle with illegal immigrants continues to escalate.

Illegal immigrants trying to get across the border "are getting so bold as to try to run over officers, assaulting officers," said Sheriff Arvin West of Hudspeth County. "They're definitely out gunning us, out manning us and the sophistication that they're using is beyond our capabilities at this point."

West, along with four other sheriffs and a representative of the Texas Border Sheriff's Coalition, came to Washington, D.C., to discuss the situation with Congress today. Rep. Michael McCaul (R.-Tex.), who represents their district, actively participated in the discussions. Following the presentation of a video clip documenting the terror along the border, McCaul said he couldn't believe what he had seen.

"Rocket-propelled grenades, heavy machine gun fire, many bodies lying in the street -- you'd think you're looking at the streets of Baghdad and yet it's right across from our border in Texas," he said. "This bleeds over into our country and that's why it's so critical to secure our border."

Sheriff Rick Flores of Webb County oversees the city of Laredo, which, he says, "is probably the hottest spot in terms of violence."

"These people pretty much have taken control of the border and they're expanding it to New Mexico and Arizona," Flores said. "They want to take control of the whole border, and they pretty much have control right now."

Flores continued: "Since they already have an infrastructure in place, what we're concerned about is potential terrorists making their way through Mexico. We've already got some intelligence that they're making their way through Mexico, using Mexico as a jump board as they're making their way into the United States."

Asked by HUMAN EVENTS if any of the men had seen an evidence of al Qaeda-related terrorists entering the U.S. while patrolling the border, Rick Glancey of the Texas Border Sheriff's Coalition said that information must be kept confidential as ongoing investigations are currently taking place.

"But I will say this to you ... [earlier] this year, [Robert] Mueller (director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation) made reference to the fact that there were some Iraqis that were intercepted trying to make their way into the United States," Glancey said. "If someone from the federal government in law enforcement is telling you that, then I think all the stories you're hearing from members of Congress, and maybe members of the U.S. Senate, will put you in the right line of what we're having to deal with."

In response to questions about the practicality of a fence, Flores said a physical barrier along the border, such as the one in San Diego, would be helpful only in certain areas of Texas.

"The reason they've got a wall [in California] is that because it's no man's land," he explained. "Well, in Texas it's a little different -- you know the border -- people own land along the border. It's very difficult for you to come in there and say, 'You know what, we're going build a wall,' when these people use the river for irrigation and to water their cattle. They are looking at a virtual wall which is technology and that's worked out really great."

More than anything, the sheriffs would like to see H.R. 4360, the bill passed by the House in December, fully funded.

The bill designates local sheriff's offices as the second line of defense along the border, allowing them to come to the assistance of United States Customs Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement. But it has yet to be approved for funding.

And, according to Flores, that's what they are waiting on.

"We have to improve our resources -- and I'm talking about local law enforcement and that's the reason why we're here is because we have to assist federal agencies and the thing is that local law enforcement has never received any support and the Texas-Mexican border has been neglected for a very long time," he said.

Thanks for reinforcing my point. These illegals do not deserve any respect and thet will not get any from me. I don't look at any one of them as equals and if you consider yourself as an equal than your saying your a felon too. This crap has to stop. I say shoot to kill orders on the border are in order.

Just look at the crime rates in prodominate Mexican Illegal areas. Oh, their food is good, but their music is stupid.

Trust me, I'm not for illegals...but we're touching on a subject that we "white" folks fear most....working for minimum wage.. and I quote "low-paying food processing jobs in Southern and Midwest towns. "  low paying...means minimum wage....how many of YOU folks are out there will work for minimum wage...when welfare pays more?!!?  LMAO!  that's right none of you...so until we fix OUR GOVERNMENT, and bring back STRONG ARM labor unions....sh!t jobs will ALWAYS go to the illegals, 'cause those big companies only want BIG PROFITS, so they can fly thier jets and live on islands....not fair labor practices with fair wages! 

there's some meat...white chicken meat for ya'll to chew on!


CBS) The Census Bureau reports the number of illegal immigrants in this country doubled in the past decade, to more than 8 million. Many were smuggled in and as CBS News Correspondent Bob McNamara reports, one American company is accused of being caught up in the practice.

Tyson Foods Inc., the world's largest poultry processor, has been indicted on charges of conspiracy to smuggling illegal immigrants to work at its U.S. plants as a way to boost profits.

In a 15-page, 36-count federal indictment, the poultry processing giant, one of its vice presidents and five managers are accused of conspiracy to recruit and smuggle illegal immigrants into this country to work at 15 Tyson plants in nine states.

"Myself, I believe they gave it their blessing. (It) saved them money," says Lt. Detective Dave Adams of the Bedford County Sheriff's Department.

Shelbyville, Tenn. police uncovered the case and confiscated dozens of forged IDs from Hispanic workers at the town's Tyson processing plant.

Undercover cameras and informants led them to a local Mexican grocery where police say store owner Amador Anchondo-Rascon was the self-styled "jefe de jefes" - the "boss of the bosses" -- who was allegedly paid to supply hundreds of illegal workers to Tyson for years.

Jailed in Tennessee, Mexican-native Anchando-Rascon is at the center of the biggest immigrant smuggling case ever involving a major American company.

"If you needed false documents to gain employment such as a social security card or resident alien card he was the one who could procure them for you," says Shelbyville Police Officer Bill Logue.

Declining on-camera interviews with CBS News, a Tyson headquarters statement says any violations "were isolated incidents" that "involved only a handful of mid- and lower-level managers and were a direct breach of company policy."

And Bedford County Sheriff Clay Parker warns, "the illegal workers are nationwide, it's not just here."

For years, thousands of illegal immigrants have followed Mexico's "chicken trail," a human smuggling route of desert hikes and long bus rides to the U.S. border.

Though many are caught trying to smuggle into this country, many others reach the low-paying food processing jobs in Southern and Midwest towns.

Now, instead of only rounding up the usual illegal suspects, federal prosecutors and police are going after the companies that supply the jobs.

"That's what this case is about. It's about people that used the unfortunate circumstances of the illegal alien to line their own pockets," says Parker.

Anchando-Rascon may testify against Tyson with the hope of lessening his jail time and to avoid being deported.

And the good life he dreamed of in small-town America is now a nightmare of his own making.

Unions are not the answer. When the illegals are gone and Tyson and the others can't find labor at min. wage. They will have to increase salary in order to attract workers otherwise they don't produce. As long as they can get illegals they will never pay more than minimum wage. It's the illegals that are causing this " $hit jobs " to pay minimum wage. So, get rid of the illegals and if the CEO of Tyson and other companies want to continue getting their bonuses they will be forced to increase wages without Labor unions.

Now chew on that whole chicken for a while.

The illegals are the problem. They will accept the wages and Americans won't. Therefore no illegals = wage increases. simple math really

Hey...it's better than Nazi Germany...or maybe that's what you're suggesting ...round 'em all up and put them in the tyson camp in mexico...yippy for NAFTA....that why everyone wins...right!?  our government sold us out...and the illegals are here to stay.  AND I'M NOT HAPPY 'BOUT THAT AT ALL!

again I agree with what you're saying about illegals...but the only way to change Gov Regs and "greased" political fingers....kind of like the ones you find at KFC and all those other fat food joints, is change out every failed part....like a piece of egypt equipment coming in for repair...all new when you're done with it.

we're screwed...face it now....no more retirements...we all will be working till we're dead!  Wallyword is where you'll find me...with the illegals bossing me around....'cause eventually they own everything.


Peace brother....we need a war.

I think they all just need to be deported and if they want to come back they can legally apply.

This country was built by immigrants from day 1, and I would hate to deny any foreign national their chance at the "American Dream."  My Russian neighbors emigrated here, took their classes, and became naturalized American citizens.  They speak English, work hard, pay their taxes, and enjoy their new American lifestyle.  Victor doesn't quite understand all the hoopla around the Superbowl, but he's a staunch Duke college basketball fan, so I think he's adjusted quite nicely...

My family emigrated from Germany 150 years ago, bought land, built a church, learned English, paid their taxes, and obeyed the law.  They grabbed their piece of the American Dream, and passed on their love of America to all the generations since...

There is no unemployment problem in this country, but there are a lot of Americans who are unwilling to work a "menial" job.  Who picks all those apples in Washington?  Who mows the grass in Cincinnati?  Immigrants do, because most Americans, of any color, feel that that work is beneath them.  Most of the immigrants that I have dealt with are here legally, work hard, pay their taxes, and speak decent English.  There are a few bad apples, like there are in any culture...  My sister's roof in Mississippi was replaced by a mostly-Mexican crew, all here legally, who did a fine job at a reasonable price.  Would I work a roofing job down South for $5 or $10 bucks an hour?  No way...

I hear the Democrats and the unions say they want to let all of the aliens in, pay for their schooling and health care, but I completely refute their logic, except for the part where they gain a large bloc of voters to help them get back in power...  I feel the effects of illegal immigration with higher insurance costs, higher medical costs, higher school taxes.  The unions solved some problems 100 years ago, but they've solved damned few since then, and won't solve this one, either...

Come to our country legally, learn the language, work hard, obey the law, pay your taxes, and there is no limit to what you can accomplish.  Come into my country at night with a few pounds of cocaine strapped to your back, and you and your kind will feel the wrath of the most powerful nation on Earth descend on you like white on snow (insert sound of pistol safety clicking here).

Do it right, and we'll help you out.  Do it not, and we'll ship your butt back to Mexico City to make room for a legitimate immigrant who wants to better their lot in life.

I think we have the money, resources, and technology to secure our northern and southern borders and our ports of entry.  Take the illegals out of the equation, and the immigrants who come here legally will fill the void, and work their way up from there.  I started my working career as a busboy making $1.49/hour doing "menial" work.  Now I make $40/hour, the result of hard work and paying my dues, and not any union dues, I might add...  The American Dream is still here, for Americans and immigrants alike.  This country has always existed with the foundation of the hard work of a law-abiding citizen bettering themselves in a capitalist society, and contributing back to the society as a result of their efforts.  Bill Gates realized his American dream (love him or hate him), and he contributes millions of dollars to worthwhile charities to help those not as fortunate as himself.  I don't make the same money as Bill, but I donate my time and money where I can to help people out.  We all do, to one extent or another.  Americans, by and large, are a helpful people, and if you come to this country legally, we'll be happy to help you contribute to our diverse society.  We'll also help you across the Rio Grande river, in a southerly direction, if we catch you swimming the thing heading north...

Apr 7, 1:21 AM (ET)
By DAVID ESPO

WASHINGTON (AP) - Putting aside party differences, Senate Republicans and Democrats coalesced Thursday around compromise legislation that holds out the hope of citizenship to many of the estimated 11 million immigrants living in the United States unlawfully.

"We can no longer afford to delay reform," said Republican Sen. John McCain and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy in a statement that capped weeks of struggle to find common ground.

But delay soon set in as party leaders became embroiled in a procedural dispute that threatened prospects for passage by week's end, if not longer. Democrats blocked votes on Republican amendments, and Republicans responded by accusing Democrats of trying to scuttle a bill they had embraced earlier in the day.

"I believe there are some people who would rather have no bill," said Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., a Cuban-born first-term senator. He declined to name any Democrats by name.

The seesaw nature of events was in keeping with the unpredictable course of the election-year legislation, designed to enhance border security and regulate the flow of future temporary workers as well as affect the lives of illegal immigrants.

President Bush said he was pleased with the announced compromise, and urged the Senate to pass legislation by week's end.

But the emerging compromise drew fire from both ends of the political spectrum. Conservative Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, likened it to an amnesty bill that cleared Congress in 1986, while AFL-CIO President John Sweeney said it threatened to "drive millions of hardworking immigrants further into the shadows of American society, leaving them vulnerable to exploitation."

Still, after days of partisan, election-year rancor, an overnight breakthrough on the future of illegal immigrants propelled the Senate closer to passage of the most sweeping immigration legislation in two decades.

In an indication of the complicated political forces at work, officials of both parties disagreed about which side had blinked. But they agreed that a decision to reduce the number of future temporary workers allowed into the country had broken a deadlock that threatened as late as Wednesday night to scuttle efforts to pass a bill. The change will limit temporary work permits to 325,000 a year, down from 400,000 in earlier versions of the bill.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., characterized the developments as a "huge breakthrough." Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada said he was optimistic about final passage, but cautioned, "We can't declare victory."

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said: "While it admittedly is not perfect, the choice we have to make is whether it is better than no bill, and the choice is decisive."

Officials described a complex series of provisions:

- Illegal immigrants who have been in the country for at least five years could receive legal status after meeting several conditions, including payment of a $2,000 fines and any back taxes, clearing a background check and learning English. After six more years, they could apply for permanent residency without leaving the United States. They could seek citizenship five years later.

- Illegal immigrants in the country for between two and five years could obtain a temporary work visa after reporting to a border point of entry. Aides referred to this as "touch base and return," since people covered would know in advance they would be readmitted to the United States.

- Officials said it could take as long as 13 to 14 years for some illegal immigrants to gain citizenship. It part, that stems from an annual limit of 450,000 on green cards, which confer legal permanent residency and are a precursor to citizenship status.

- Illegal immigrants in the United States for less than two years would be required to leave the country and apply for re-entry alongside anyone else seeking to emigrate.

Separately, the legislation provides a new program for 1.5 million temporary agriculture industry workers over five years.

It also includes provisions for employers to verify the legal status of workers they hire, but it was not clear what sanctions, if any, would apply to violators.

To secure the border, the bill calls for a virtual fence - as opposed to the literal barrier contained in House legislation - consisting of surveillance cameras, sensors and other monitoring equipment along the long, porous border with Mexico.

Conservatives unhappy with the deal voiced their concerns to Frist, while Democrats sought assurances that the agreement would not be undercut in any future compromise talks with the House. McCain told reporters that he and other members of the GOP were circulating a letter pledging to vote against any changes demanded by the House that "would destroy this very delicately crafted compromise."

The House has passed legislation limited to border security, but Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., and other leaders have signaled their willingness in recent days to broaden the bill in compromise talks with the House.

The comments sparked a furious counterattack from critics.

"I can just about guarantee you we're not going to get a majority of the House members (to agree) on amnesty to 10 million people," Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., said at a news conference. "I am disappointed that apparently Mr. Frist has caved in to the desires of Democrats, to Kennedy," he added.

Tancredo's remarks underscored the unpredictable political fallout from the issue as Republicans seek legislation to fortify the borders without offending the fast-growing Hispanic voting population. Bush has long argued that a guest worker program is an essential element of border security, but potential challengers for the 2008 GOP nomination have come at the issue from a variety of perspectives.

McCain and Kennedy have worked hard to find common ground, and Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., supported a bipartisan measure that emerged from the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Frist, a potential presidential candidate in 2008, sought to establish more conservative credentials when he initially backed a bill limited to border security, an approach that drew criticism from some members of the rank and file who said he was placing his own ambitions ahead of the party's interest. At the same time, Frist has repeatedly called for a comprehensive bill - adopting Bush's rhetoric - and involved himself in the fitful negotiations over the past several days.

Well said Doc.....

By the way, speaking of going on strike, this is NOT France!

See below...

FRENCH CORPORATION
You have two cows.  You go on strike because you want three cows.  You go to lunch and drink wine.  Life is good.

  Some really good points here.  Myself. I do not mind immigration at all, it is good.  As long as they move here legally with  the idea of learning the language and supporting the country and becoming American.
  What irritates me about congress is that they do not address a solution to the problem.  They talk about enforcing the entry control points.  HA, Idiots!  That is not the problem, they need to control the rest of the border.  And frankly, if they are armed when they come across the border anywhere, they should be shot on site.

Some input from Ann Coulter...

This is the only country on Earth that thinks it's not sporting to consider our own interests in choosing immigrants. Try showing up in any other country on the planet, illiterate and penniless, and announcing: "I've seen pictures of your country and it looks great. I think I'd like to live here! Oh, and by the way, would you mind changing all your government and business phone messages, street signs and ballots into my native language? Thanks!" They would laugh you out of the country.

What seems not to have occurred to the "NO HUMAN BEING IS ILLEGAL" crowd is that this is a country, not a public park.

There are more than 6 billion people in the world, many of whom apparently like the idea of living in the wealthiest democracy on Earth. But if the billions of people of the world did live here, it wouldn't be "here" anymore. America is special for a reason that must transcend the right to vote — or everyone would be trying to immigrate to Iraq right now.

America has a seller's market in immigration, but thanks to Teddy Kennedy's 1965 immigration law, we no longer favor skilled workers from developed nations, but instead favor unskilled immigrants from the Third World. Kennedy's bill promptly cut the number of European immigrants in half and increased Third World immigrants to 85 percent of the total.

Not surprisingly, post-1965 immigrants have sharply higher levels of poverty and welfare dependence. Europeans may not seem like ideal new immigrants, but the truth is, if what they want is welfare, they'll stay in France.

It's as if we've got the last Xbox 360s available on Christmas Eve and instead of doubling the price, we're entertaining low-ball offers. Or more accurately, we're paying our customers to take the darn things off our hands — and the customers are still indignant with us.

On CNN's "Lou Dobbs Tonight" on Monday, Dobbs was interviewing Nativo Lopez, president of the Mexican-American Political Association about his demand for "full immediate, unconditional legalization for all persons currently in the United States."

Dobbs posed this innocuous question about Lopez's planned boycott, "You're talking about a boycott of all illegal aliens in this country?"

Lopez exploded: "Well, first off, I refute your terminology. You don't say 'kike,' 'patty,' 'WOP,' OK. You don't say "nigger"! ... You're using language that's offensive to me and offensive to my people! ... You pollute the air every day, Dobbs. ... That language is offensive, it's derogatory, it's denigrating, and don't use that terminology to me again, referring to my people!"

Dobbs eventually ended Lopez's Tourette's episode by calmly asking him what he expected the impact of the boycott to be.

An hour later on MSNBC's "Hardball," Dave Rodriguez, of the League of United Latin American Citizens, leapt in to denounce Rep. Tom Tancredo for using the word "amnesty." He said: "There isn't any such thing as amnesty in this law. I don't understand what this debate is. That's your own terminology on it ..."

Bank robbers and drug dealers ought to start claiming that the words "bank robber" and "drug dealer" are akin to the N-word. They could accuse lawmakers of "criminalizing felonies" and claim they don't understand what the word "jailbreak" means.

At the same time on CNN's "The Situation Room," Maria Elena Salinas, an anchor at Univision, was informing Wolf Blitzer that "all Hispanics feel offended by what has been going on, by the rhetoric, the level of the negativity that you hear coming out of Capitol Hill and also on some television stations and by some journalists."

So it's really more like we've got the last Xbox 360s available on Christmas Eve and the customers are not only demanding money to take the hottest sales item off our hands, but are verbally abusing us and acting petulant. I'm offended that you would even think about asking me to pay for the Xbox 360! You say it has a "20 GB detachable hard drive"? Well, would you use the word "kike"?

As hardworking as illegal immigrants are when they come here, they are immediately demagogued by liberals into adopting the victimhood pose so popular on college campuses. Everybody wants to act like his ancestors were brought here on slave ships.

Consider this e-mail from Michele Waslin, La Raza's director of Immigration Policy Research, to her members denouncing Sen. Lamar Alexander's proposal to provide government grants to immigrants who want to learn English and American history and to organizations offering those courses. (I'd be happy with a law that simply trained new immigrants not to be "offended" all the time.)

Even though this potentially meant free money for La Raza, Waslin — of the Guadalajara Waslins — ominously warned that while the amendment "doesn't overtly mention assimilation, it is very strong on the patriotism and traditional American values language in a way which is potentially dangerous to our communities."

Meanwhile, Americans aren't allowed to consider whether millions of immigrants refusing to learn English and American history is "potentially dangerous to our communities." Here, please — we'll pay you, just take the whole Xbox 360 factory.

That's a very good description of the situation.  I've only read a little of one of her books, but she is always very concise as far as I can tell.  Good piece.

As you no doubt know, illegal aliens and their handlers plan to hold their next Senate intimidation rallies on May 1, better known as the Marxist holiday of "May Day." The May Day campaign will consist of yet more anti-law-enforcement marches and a nationwide "boycott" of shopping. The aim of the boycott is to demonstrate the purchasing power of the 11 million immigration criminals demanding amnesty. The boycott will also include a general strike by immigration criminals, who are being encouraged to skip work that day. Now it appears that illegal aliens are here to just skip the jobs that no American is willing to skip.

If the boycott and strike are successful, this means that May 1 will be A DAY WITHOUT ILLEGAL ALIENS! Lines will be shorter. Clerks will all speak English. Businesses that have been honest enough to hire legal residents will be poised to finally enjoy a competitive advantage! It will be morning again in America. Every actual American should make a point to get out and support those businesses and counteract the criminal boycott movement.

Spend like a congressman! Spend like George W. Bush! Heck, spend like Teddy Kennedy on a junket to a distillers' convention. Spend in freedom and order in a mall or Wal-Mart near you. I hereby declare May 1 to be a national holiday -- Conservative Shopping Day.

Show the doubters that a day without illegal aliens is not a crisis, it's just a good start. And spread the word. Forward this notice or send out your own. Let it be shouted, in clear unaccented English, from every mountaintop and blog: SPEND, GRINGOS, SPEND!

Lastly, be sure to make note of which businesses can still function on a day without illegal aliens, so that you can patronize them everyday for a long time. Let's turn the day without illegal aliens into an everyday thing.

TO THE WAL-MART, COMRADES!

HERE HERE!!!

   I don't mind imigrants, most of us are, but it's the illegal part I'm not so fond of.  Hell, I'll even settle for "learning" to speak the english language.  I can't get over these people DEMANDING amnesty, citizenship, or anything else.  Do it legally, or face the concequences.

just out of curiousity anyone else had the idea of rounding up all the illegals on May 1st and sending them home?  Or Iraq as conscripts?

11,000,000 people combing the Afghanistan countryside; ought to find bin Laden in no time at all!  Not a bad idea...!

Let them march down the road where I live and I will be racking up the points. Just kidding.  :evil:

If they are all planning on marching, isn't there supposed to be a law enforcement presence to " protect " the marchers. They could always start picking them up a few at a time starting at the rear of the column. They shouldn't notice anything until a bunch are bagged.

Just What About 'Illegal' Do They Not Understand?

by Assemblyman Ray Haynes
Posted Apr 17, 2006

Sonny Bono, in the fight over Proposition 187 (the 1994 initiative that would have rescinded welfare benefits for illegal aliens) had the best line about the debate over illegal immigration. Many charges were tossed back and forth about the initiative and the motivation of its sponsors. The response of the future congressman to those charges was always: "What is it about illegal that they don't understand?"

Exactly!

Like many others, I watched television as the protestors waved their Mexican flags, then changed those flags to American flags, then yelled "Si Se Puede," then yelled "Yes, We Can," then demanded the same rights as American citizens, then said they were Americans.

Well, no, they are not. When someone breaks the laws of this country to enter it, for whatever reason, whether it is to work, or obtain free medical care, free food, welfare, a driver's license, and reduced college tuition, they are still not Americans. We have a legally mandated process, established after years of debate, negotiations, arguments, social consensus, and legal maneuverings to determine how someone becomes a citizen. Until someone follows that process, they are not Americans, not entitled to become Americans, not entitled to claim to be Americans, and not entitled to the rights of Americans.

We are a very generous country. We allow more people than any other country in the world to come into our country legally, stay, and become naturalized citizens. We are second to none in welcoming people from all cultures to join us in the world's common quest to extend representative government and individual liberty throughout the world. We don't even really ask that much of people to go through the process. It may take some time, and it is usually stuck in the inevitable bureaucracy, but once someone has completed the process, they are Americans. In France, you can move to France, but you never become French. You can move to China, but you will never become Chinese. If you follow a few simple steps, you can move to the United States and become an American.

One of those steps is not sneaking through the fence, avoiding the law for ten years, receiving thousands of dollars in government aid, and then demanding amnesty for your illegal behavior. Yet, at this time, thousands of people throughout this country are demanding that we make that a legitimate way of becoming an American citizen. In essence, they want to profit from their illegal behavior.

That is just not right. Go home, follow the law, come here legally, and we will welcome you with open arms. Break our laws, and we will be justifiably outraged by your behavior. That is how it is, and how it ought to be.

The California Border Police should to do one simple thing—enforce federal immigration law, mainly because the federal government is refusing to do so. Enforcement of the law is the right thing to do. If we find that the law doesn't work, that we need a larger labor pool, then we debate the best way to accomplish that goal. But, if we don't enforce the laws we have now, it won't matter what laws we have in the future. We will still fail to have an immigration policy.

The first thing that makes anyone a good American is their ability to follow the law. That is all anyone is asking these protestors to do. It is not that hard, and, if they do it, we will all be their good friends and neighbors.

I'm a little embarassed for some of the posters concerning this topic. Some of them look like the source might have vehicles up on blocks surrounding their freshly painted trailer.
I would like to think people in the calibration arena would have a little more intelligence. If you're going to address a topic that you most likely know little about (I qualify) then it might make sense to educate yourself about the facts rather than get all whipped-up on emotion. You might want to focus your energies on a 'real' issue such as the elimination of the middle-class by corporate America rather than have your attention diverted by an emotional topic during a mid-term election year.

I appreciate your comments, but please don't be embarassed for me.  I'm all for immigration, because it's one of the things that has made this country what it is; the diversity of our culture is a powerful force that most countries in the world don't have and fail to utilize it when they do.

I only want the immigrants to come here legally.  I want the government to enforce the laws on the books.  ...and I think I can say for ther majority of members on this site that that is our only complaint- they come here illegally, and now they want to be citizens.  Sorry.  Gotta follow the rules here.  There's a lot of opportunity in this country, and we're happy to share the wealth and help them get those opportunities- if they do it legally.

Here here doc.

Now, mjoeng1, regale us with lusty tales of corporate Americas assault on middle class!

I'm still gonna stick with my story....I'm NOT cleaning chickens for $10 an hour!!! :-D

So any one that arrived here before this was illegal...including our FOREFATHERS!


ELLIS ISLAND

Ellis island, c.27 acres (10.9 hectares), in Upper New York Bay, SW of Manhattan island. Government-controlled since 1808, it was long the site of an arsenal and a fort, but most famously served (1892—1954) as the chief immigration station of the United States. It is estimated that 40% of all Americans had an ancestor arrive at Ellis Island. Now part of the Statue of Liberty National Monument (see Liberty, Statue of), the island was opened to tourists in 1976. In 1990 an immigration museum was opened, and many records of immigrant arrivals have been computerized and are available there and on line.



ANGEL ISLAND
largest island in San Francisco Bay, W Calif. Explored by the Spanish in 1775, it came under U.S. control in 1851. The U.S. army used the island as a base from 1863 to 1946, and from 1955 to 1962 a radar and missile site was there. From 1910 to 1940 the island was also used to process mainly Asian immigrants to the United States, earning it the nickname "Ellis Island of the West." During World War II, enemy prisoners of war were confined on Angel Island. The island is now a state park.

  Not "anyone that arrived here before was illegal", only those who came here illegally.  All those folks that came through Ellis Island or Angel Island did it legally.  They were documented.

   I'm not condoning the land grab made by early settlers, but there is a difference (at least legally) between them and those we are discussing.  If nothing else, there was no law at the time prohibiting that form of "immigration".  Now there is. 

   The fact that I'm not willing to do a certain job for the same pay as an illegal immigrant doesn't justify that person breaking the law.   
   
   The bottom line for me is that I WANT them here, but I want it to be legally.  Immigrants are hardworking, honest people who just want a better life for their family.  Nothing wrong with that, it's the same thing I want! 

So what do we do? 

   Open the borders and let everyone in?  Probably not, there is a need to be safe, and to know who's here.  It'd also be a good idea to collect some taxes from these hardworking folks, so things can get better for all of us.  The more people there are paying taxes, the less each of us should have to pay, right?
   Maybe some of the laws could be changed to make it a little easier to immigrate.  $300-$600 (that's what I heard the cost is, but I don't know for sure) is a lot of money in some of the countries these folks come from.  If it were faster and cheaper, there would be less incentive to come here illegally, unless you have something to hide, like being a criminal or a terrorist. 

 Looking at the serious side. I have seen the attempts to enter illegally, I admit it has been up here on the northern border. We have no idea how many have made it across the Great Lakes and the connecting rivers alive. All that is normally found is a cheap plastic raft, either beached onshore or washed up onshore.
The problem is the borders are porous and people will contiue to enter illegally, we really don't have the trained man power to watch every foot of the border, and to those sneaking in the process to enter legally is to expensive and time cunsumming for the poor semi-literate peasant, all he knows is that beyound the border awaits the land of milk and honey.
Do we change the law and let in every person seeking entry, continue the quota system or just close the borders down and let no one in ?
 

I think we should enforce the laws currently on the books.

We do need more manpower/technology to secure the border, but it'll still be porous enough to let 'em in if they're determined enough...  But those that do get caught after making it across need to be deported, not given a driver's license and a welfare check.

I totally agree with you. It pisses me off esp. when they said they built America. Bullsh*t....If anyone build America, it was slaves. I hate to see them wasting so much time and energy protesting in my beautiful country, thinking it's jacked-up, whenin reality, they should be in THEIR country protesting their government trying to get them to change. Maybe if that happen, the mexicans wouldn't have to sneak arcoss the border if their country was stable....

They have it all wrong....PROTEST YOUR F**KED COUNTRY, NOT MINE....nuff said

Get' er Dun! :-D

Why is it that the left always denounces people on the right for "wrapping themselves in the American flag," and is so fond of saying "patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels" -- and then celebrates this same behavior when performed by illegal aliens?

Last week's giant pro-illegal immigration rallies in many U.S. cities have got to be the greatest exercises of phony flag waving in the history of America. And newspapers like the Washington Post promoted it to the hilt, with front page pictures of demonstrators waving a sea of American flags and carrying signs saying, "We are all Americans."

It was such an incredibly obvious act of mass political cynicism. The first mass pro-illegal alien demonstrations a couple of weeks before displayed the demonstrators' true loyalties by waving the Mexican flag. Now they all turn on a dime and there's hardly a Mexican flag to be seen. It's all we-love-America-red-white-and-blue. Yet the chant is still the same: "Si se puede" in Spanish, not "Yes we can" in English.

But "yes we can" what? The answer is: "Yes we can defy America's laws. Yes we can illegally come to America with impunity. Yes we can get free medical care and have our children educated at US taxpayer expense. Yes we can intimidate politicians into giving us amnesty. Yes we can remain loyal to Mexico and pretend we want to be American without adopting America's culture and English language. Yes we can break America apart and return the Southwest US to Mexico."

The overwhelming majority of American citizens oppose the flood of illegals streaming across the U.S. border with Mexico and amnesty for them once they are here. The latest USA Today/Gallup poll (conducted April 7-8) reveals that 81% of Americans agree that "illegal immigration is out of control," while 61% agree that "the government should make illegal immigration a crime."

Americans are coming to understand that illegal aliens from Mexico are not immigrants. They come here for jobs, not to become Americans -- which means learning English and transferring patriotic loyalty from Mexico to America. They have no intention of assimilating into American culture. Rather they angrily insist on not assimilating but remaining alien.

Americans have got to start saying "Yes we can" in English: Yes we can shut down the illegal flood across the Mexican border, yes we can deny them amnesty, yes we can demand respect for American law, and yes we can keep America intact.

Ultimately, America is going to have to say "Yes we can" to Mexico: Yes we can liberate Mexico from socialism and corruption, yes we can insist upon political and economic freedom for Mexico, yes we can demand that economic opportunity be given to Mexicans so that they will stay in their own country and make a good living.

America needs to tell the ruling elite of Mexico that they will fail in its plan to recapture the Southwest United States (California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, and Texas) that Mexico lost in the 1848 Mexican-American War. That they should seek psychiatric counseling in overcoming their inferiority complex with regard to America. That its insistence that Mexico remain a country of Third World poverty so they can remain rich will be abandoned.

The focus of the problem of "illegal immigration" should be Mexico. You would think Mexico would have learned its lesson 158 years ago that it's very unwise to provoke America beyond tolerance. Mexico City's ruling elite need to understand that si America puede, yes America can teach this lesson to them again.

I just don't understand the problem. Crossing America's borders without a Visa or Diplomatic documenation is ILLEAGAL! I just got a speeding ticket Monday. I want to go to the court house and chant "Yes We Can" to the judge. I will still have to pay the fine and more than likely I will be locked up for contempt of court. Why do Americans have to obey the laws and ILLEAGAL ALIENs shouldn't? That's bull$h!+. They break our laws and now we are going to give them a reward? My @$$. The Americans need to go the the polls this fall and shout "YES WE CAN" and get the elected officials that want this bullcrap to continue out of office!  :x

Thanks to our forefathers and the second amendment we have the right to bare arms. Our country is being invaded by a people that is attacking our way of life. I say we defend our coutry the way our founders expect us too. :evil:

Let's  make Mexico a US territory...Cananda's next....We'll send the Boy scouts up there to wipe'em out....Maybe they'll get awarded a badge or sumthing....

We can just send my 8 year old son with his baseball bat to Canada. He'll take care of them. Besides my son ( as Thraxas knows ) is a 1st Kyu Brown belt in Kenpo. He can take care of any Canadian military ( if there is a such thing, since it's never been proven ). :-D

Here you go. Check out this statistic:

In Los Angeles, 95 percent of all outstanding warrants for homicide (which total 1,200 to 1,500) target illegal aliens. Up to two-thirds of all fugitive felony warrants (17,000) are for illegal aliens.

And their just here for the jobs Americans won't do?

Coup,
I have to take exception to that- the Canadian military proved their valor in WWII.  I visited a few Canadian cemetaries in Italy when I worked there, and the stories are still told by the locals who remember the U.S. and Canadian forces that liberated their country from the Axis powers.

...unlike France, who seems to have a severe case of memory loss whenever it comes time to give the U.S. a hand in something...

Since WWII canada has become more a socialist State. Canada had a military, but now it's the girl scouts.

Let's send the Mexicans to France. :evil:

Quote from: flew-da-coup on 04-20-2006 -- 09:26:03
Here you go. Check out this statistic:

In Los Angeles, 95 percent of all outstanding warrants for homicide (which total 1,200 to 1,500) target illegal aliens. Up to two-thirds of all fugitive felony warrants (17,000) are for illegal aliens.

And their just here for the jobs Americans won't do?

Quote from: docbyers on 04-20-2006 -- 09:27:00
Coup,
I have to take exception to that- the Canadian military proved their valor in WWII.  I visited a few Canadian cemetaries in Italy when I worked there, and the stories are still told by the locals who remember the U.S. and Canadian forces that liberated their country from the Axis powers.

...unlike France, who seems to have a severe case of memory loss whenever it comes time to give the U.S. a hand in something...

That might of been true then, but there is no excuse for Brian Adams. Plus they're having problems with racism in their military....

Quote from: flew-da-coup on 04-20-2006 -- 08:26:18
We can just send my 8 year old son with his baseball bat to Canada. He'll take care of them. Besides my son ( as Thraxas knows ) is a 1st Kyu Brown belt in Kenpo. He can take care of any Canadian military ( if there is a such thing, since it's never been proven ). :-D

Hey Coup,
Get your son involved with Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu.....Good stuff...the pic u see of me is with Frank Shamrock....

My boy started learning Kenpo at age 3.5 years old and continues to practice and study. I myself grew up taking Wing chun for 8 years ( 8-16yrs ). I most recently obtained my black belt in Kenpo this past summer. I am really wanting to take Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. My wife says I can't spend anymore money on my hobbies until my youngest  starts school and she goes back to work. TOO EXPENSIVE she says. I hope to find a place by this fall when my youngest goes starts school.

Gotta go back to page 1 of the thread...  Basically 11,000,000 illegal aliens want the rest of us to say that it's cool that they came here illegally, and give 'em a free pass.  The boycott will show their "political power."  Most of us on the site just want them to go home and fix their own governments...

You said it, DOC :x

GO HOME !!!! :evil:

Go Home the way you came.

Stock the Rio Grande with alligators and cottonmouths. That might help.

It is much worse then the government lets on.  If you look up a law called H1B, you will discover that congress lets corporations import foreign nations to work in the high tech jobs.  The last I knew of, they were allotted 300,000 per year.  But it goes up evry year also.
   

Start locking up and slapping big fines on companies that hire illeagals then the illeagals will go home because there would be no jobs for them.

This sounds dangerously close to enforcement of govt regulation/law...............hmmmm.

It would be nice for them to do their jobs.

Unfortunately for myself, I haven't kept up on this issue but reading through this has given me some real perspective.  Now just looking back through this country's history, not even that long ago, immigrants came through Ellis Island seeking citizenship here in the US.  I bring this up because of one very imprtant detail.  They came through the proper channels to obtain residence and citizenship here.  Now there may have been people that bypassed that system, but for the most part people tried to go the right way.  Doc also makes a very good point about the countries of origin for these illegals.  If there are so many illegals and they want to show their political power, why don't they go back and make that statement in their own country?  You'd think that might send a HUGE message to their government and might start changes that could improve their country for years to come, and might even start an upward drive that would make life liveable there.  Otherwise start studying, learn the language, and obtain citizenship the way it's supposed to be done.

Coby, music tastes notwithstanding, has summed this up very well in one nice paragraph.

These young kids are smarter than we were at their age!  Well done, lad!

Damn Coby, I could not have said it better.

We are supposed to have 200 thousand Illegals and there friends marching in downtown Orlando today. MY GOD! Traffic is really going to suck!

I didn't notice any disruptions at all from the boycott.  'Course, here in Cincinnati, we don't have the volume of illegals that other areas of the country have.  Most immigrants here went to work as per normal, and all was well.  Our biggest news item yesterday was the Reds' baseball game...

How was Florida or California?

Here in Orlando they had 5,000 people and it shut down downtown traffic for just an hour. I guess they don't have any impact what so ever other than being in the way. Their actions spoke louder than words. They were waving there country's flag and demanding citizenship here. Man, I sure would like to get away with kicking them all between the legs. I think they managed to piss the real Americans off by walking our streets demanding our government to give them what they want.  Anyone that breaks the laws coming into our country illegally has already proven to me that they are criminals and are trash. I have no compasion for these pieces of $h!t. :x

The general impression I hear on the news was that the "boycott" was rather counter-productive.

Judging by the latest poll data I've seen, 88% of Americans think like we do here- enforce the immigration laws and improve our border security.  I heard that stat on the radio, and I didn't catch what poll it was, so I apologize for not having a reference...

A University of Dayton professor said on the radio yesterday what a lot of us have been saying all along- go protest in Mexico City.  The government in Mexico is not the only cause of the immigration problem, but it's an awfully big factor, and the Mexicans who come here ought to fix the problems at home, rather than come here and demand amnesty for breaking our laws.  650,000 illegals marching in Los Angeles won't have quite the impact of a few million marching in the Mexican capitol...

It was billed as "A Day Without Immigrants."

According to its propagandists, official and media, the purpose of the May Day walkout from schools and jobs and boycott of shops and stores was to show how much immigrants contribute and how they deserve appreciation and respect, and not to be treated like criminals.

But if this was all it was about, there would have been no need to go on strike. Americans have always welcomed immigrants. They are better treated here than anywhere on earth. While most Americans believe we now need a timeout to assimilate the 36 million here and their children -- like the moratorium we had in the Roosevelt-Truman-Eisenhower-Kennedy years -- no one urges any denial of rights to legal immigrants.

What, then, was May Day really all about?

May Day was a strike against America. It was a show of force, a demonstration of raw street power to force the government of the United States into granting to 12 million illegal aliens, who have broken our laws and broken into our country, not only the full benefits of U.S. citizenship, but full citizenship.

It was brazen act of extortion to coerce Congress to grant amnesty now, and not to enforce our immigration laws or secure the Mexican border -- or to be ready for big trouble in the streets.

Congress cannot capitulate. The response of any Congress that calls itself American to such extortion should be a direct one:

"We are not intimidated. There is going to be no amnesty. The border fence goes up this summer. Those are our non-negotiable answers to your non-negotiable demands. Demonstrate all you want. We're not capitulating."

The message that would go out to the world would be electric: Congress will have said, first, that the United States will not be cowed by strikes or boycotts by law-breakers. Second, America intends to re-establish control of her border. Third, the invasion route from Mexico is going to be closed, forever.

Fourth, those who come to America henceforth will be those we invite in. And, as guests, they will behave as guests -- or they will be going back home. As for businesses that cannot get along without illegal foreign labor, if some of their CEOs are prosecuted and put to work in Arizona building that security fence, they will rapidly rediscover how to make a buck without colluding in an invasion of their country for commercial purposes.

We are at a turning point in American history. In July of 1954, President Eisenhower, discovering that illegal aliens were pouring into the Southern United States at a rate of a million a year, put in motion Operation Wetback, which halted the invasion and sent back scores of thousands of illegals to Mexico. Many more returned voluntarily.

Thirty years later, Ronald Reagan declared an amnesty for 3 million illegal aliens, conditioned on sanctions on U.S. businesses that did not cease to hire them. Following that amnesty, the flood began. Now we have 12 million illegals here.

Between 2000 and 2005, 4.5 million were caught at the border. Four million are believed to have gotten in. No one knows exactly how many. Even Bush concedes that, among the illegals, one in 12 has a criminal record. If we have 12 million illegals here now, that means the U.S. government, in dereliction of its duty, has let into this nation in the last 20 years 1 million criminals -- like Beltway sniper John Lee Malvo -- to prey on American citizens.

While almost half of all Mexicans, in a national poll, indicated a desire to move to the United States, the rest of the Third World has gotten the message. One in every 10 citizens of Central America and the Caribbean countries has already arrived. During the War on Terror, the number of those coming into the United States illegally from countries "other than Mexico" (OTM) has tripled.

These OTMs are coming from as far away as China and Iraq.

Fifteen years ago there were 3 million to 4 million illegals here.  There are now 12 million. If these 12 million are amnestied and the border fence is not built along all 2,000 miles, the next amnesty will be for 20 million or 30 million.

During the "Generals' Revolt," when half a dozen senior officers called for the firing of Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, President Bush saw a challenge to his authority and had to throw it back. If Congress does not throw back this challenge, if Congress now capitulates to this extortion, America should start shopping for a new Congress in November -- an American Congress.

Rally 'Round the (Mexican) Flag
by James R. Edwards, Jr.

Recent and upcoming pro-amnesty rallies, where thousands of illegal immigrants and other foreigners make outrageous demands on the United States, prove several things.

One, there's no basis for the claim that only amnesty would bring the 10-12 million illegal aliens "out of the shadows." Illegal aliens aren't cowering in fear of being caught and deported. Hundreds of thousands of them brazenly march in American streets, identify themselves to news reporters as illegals and enter congressional office buildings to pressure U.S. politicians for amnesty.

Two, the demonstrations, such as in Los Angeles, Washington and New York, prove that the Bush administration won't lift a finger to enforce the laws on the books. Every member of Congress has anecdotes from his district where local police called Homeland Security after taking illegal aliens into custody, only to be told to free the lawbreakers because the feds refuse to cooperate.

But Homeland Security won't even enforce immigration laws when illegal aliens show up en masse for political theatrics. One good, prominent enforcement action at one of these events would send a signal well understood in any language: The laws are on the books for good reasons, and we intend to enforce them.

Three, the differences in Congress over how to deal with this issue reflect the two bodies and how each works. The Republican-controlled House of Representatives heard constituents loud and clear. H.R. 4437, which enjoyed strong bipartisan support, takes an "enforcement-first" approach.

The Senate Republican factions lack consensus on immigration issues. Senators tend to be much more out of touch with the people they represent. They tend to hear mostly from bigwigs, while lowly staffers answer the mail from average constituents.

Thus, just before Easter recess the Senate couldn't agree on a legislative approach. The Senate Judiciary Committee bill is a poison concoction of mass amnesty plus promiscuous guestworker plus illegal farmworker amnesty plus more than doubling of already-too-high legal immigration levels plus in-state tuition for illegal aliens.

The Hagel-Martinez "compromise" that Majority Leader Bill Frist inexplicably embraced is a blanket amnesty bill. It legalizes nearly all the illegal alien population, treating classes of illegal aliens according to how long they claim to have been here. Length of unlawful presence determines how many modest hoops someone has to jump through. It also more than doubles legal immigration levels.

The Frist bill, while omitting amnesty-guestworker schemes, doubles legal immigration. And like the other Senate legislation, Frist's S. 2454 has mediocre enforcement measures that don't measure up to the House-passed bill or even the Cornyn-Kyl (S. 1438) enforcement provisions.

Before recess, the Senate couldn't rally 60 votes to debate any of these bills. That's good, because any of them would do more harm than good.

Four, the coordinated amnesty rallies unveil the leftist ties and tactics of these groups. As the Washington Times has reported, organizers such as ANSWER and key instigators have Marxist roots. They've developed fellow travelers among Big Business, Big Religion and Big Labor.

Agitators picked the Communist May Day for another round of demonstrations. Recent "day without an immigrant" and May 1 "boycott" protests employ the favorite Communist "general strike" tactic. Demonstrators and organizers alike freely invoke ugly name-calling -- "racist," "xenophobe," "bigot" -- to stifle honest debate and intimidate decent people into silence.

Five, conditions are right for bold American leadership. President Bush could rally the "silent majority" of Americans who favor faithful enforcement of immigration laws and immigration cuts. This could help him rebound from all-time low approval ratings and salvage GOP control of the House and Senate in the traditionally brutal second-term midterm elections.

For six years, President Bush has reflexively mythologized immigration, confused capitulation for compassion, browbeaten and derided patriotic Americans as "vigilantes" and half-wits. He has continually pushed for open-ended "guestworker"/amnesty schemes and, with rare, post-9/11 exception, systematically undermined every effort at meaningful immigration enforcement.

In short, he has sold out the American people at every turn on immigration issues.

The fact the Republican-led House has displayed bold statesmanship on this issue should help insulate incumbents in upcoming elections. The House passed the kind of immigration bill the American people (as opposed to foreign interlocutors and elitists) really want.

The Senate's schizophrenia and delusional views on immigration explain the poor ratings Congress gets on this issue. They also expose Senators to greater vulnerability come Election Day.

All in all, the demonstrations present America with a choice. We'll look like spineless college administrators or Gov. Ronald Reagan in their response to 1960s campus unrest. Either we'll wave a white flag, grant amnesty and open the borders or we'll take back the red, white and blue, resolve to fight for our country and begin enforcing immigration laws today.

HAHAHAHAHA...a look at ten years ago...from the Columbus Dispatch....

"With a 97 - 3 Vote, the Senate passed an immigration bill to tighten Boarder Controls, make it tougher for illegal aliens to get U.S. jobs and curtail legal immigrants' access to social services."

damn joke...that's all this is...a damn joke...if you can beat 'em, join 'em... I'm moving to Mexico....since they're moving to the U.S..

Mexico's Immigration Law: Let's Try It Here at Home

by J. Michael Waller
Posted May 08, 2006

Mexico has a radical idea for a rational immigration policy that most Americans would love. However, Mexican officials haven't been sharing that idea with us as they press for our Congress to adopt the McCain-Kennedy immigration reform bill.

That's too bad, because Mexico, which annually deports more illegal aliens than the United States does, has much to teach us about how it handles the immigration issue. Under Mexican law, it is a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico.

At a time when the Supreme Court and many politicians seek to bring American law in line with foreign legal norms, it's noteworthy that nobody has argued that the U.S. look at how Mexico deals with immigration and what it might teach us about how best to solve our illegal immigration problem. Mexico has a single, streamlined law that ensures that foreign visitors and immigrants are:

in the country legally;
have the means to sustain themselves economically;
not destined to be burdens on society;
of economic and social benefit to society;
of good character and have no criminal records; and
contributors to the general well-being of the nation.

The law also ensures that:

immigration authorities have a record of each foreign visitor;
foreign visitors do not violate their visa status;
foreign visitors are banned from interfering in the country's internal politics;
foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses are imprisoned or deported;
foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry are imprisoned or deported;
those who aid in illegal immigration will be sent to prison.

Who could disagree with such a law? It makes perfect sense. The Mexican constitution strictly defines the rights of citizens -- and the denial of many fundamental rights to non-citizens, illegal and illegal. Under the constitution, the Ley General de Población, or General Law on Population, spells out specifically the country's immigration policy.

It is an interesting law -- and one that should cause us all to ask, Why is our great southern neighbor pushing us to water down our own immigration laws and policies, when its own immigration restrictions are the toughest on the continent? If a felony is a crime punishable by more than one year in prison, then Mexican law makes it a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico.

If the United States adopted such statutes, Mexico no doubt would denounce it as a manifestation of American racism and bigotry.

We looked at the immigration provisions of the Mexican constitution. [1] Now let's look at Mexico's main immigration law.

Mexico welcomes only foreigners who will be useful to Mexican society:

Foreigners are admitted into Mexico "according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress." (Article 32)
Immigration officials must "ensure" that "immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance" and for their dependents. (Article 34)
Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets "the equilibrium of the national demographics," when foreigners are deemed detrimental to "economic or national interests," when they do not behave like good citizens in their own country, when they have broken Mexican laws, and when "they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy." (Article 37)
The Secretary of Governance may "suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest." (Article 38)
Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country:

Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants. (Article 73)
A National Population Registry keeps track of "every single individual who comprises the population of the country," and verifies each individual's identity. (Articles 85 and 86)

A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants (Article 87), and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number (Article 91).

Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be imprisoned:
Foreigners with fake immigration papers may be fined or imprisoned. (Article 116)
Foreigners who sign government documents "with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses" are subject to fine and imprisonment. (Article 116)
Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons:

Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished. (Article 117)
Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. (Article 118)
Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison (Articles 119, 120 and 121). Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa while in Mexico -- such as working with out a permit -- can also be imprisoned.

Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says,

"A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally." (Article 123)
Foreigners with legal immigration problems may be deported from Mexico instead of being imprisoned. (Article 125)
Foreigners who "attempt against national sovereignty or security" will be deported. (Article 126)

Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law:
A Mexican who marries a foreigner with the sole objective of helping the foreigner live in the country is subject to up to five years in prison. (Article 127)
Shipping and airline companies that bring undocumented foreigners into Mexico will be fined. (Article 132)

All of the above runs contrary to what Mexican leaders are demanding of the United States. The stark contrast between Mexico's immigration practices versus its American immigration preachings is telling. It gives a clear picture of the Mexican government's agenda: to have a one-way immigration relationship with the United States.

Let's call Mexico's bluff on its unwarranted interference in U.S. immigration policy. Let's propose, just to make a point, that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) member nations standardize their immigration laws by using Mexico's own law as a model.

This article was first posted at CenterforSecurityPolicy.org.

When I hear the word " Mexico" I think of a pile of $h!+ with flies all over it or a bunch of people piled into a old white Chevy van. I guess that's the same thing. :?

The protests of this last week can be encapsulated this way: thousands of criminals wanted the government to ignore their crime. That reality is not changed by saying that they "are human and we need to recognize their humanity." Of course we recognize their humanity; they just need to follow the law. We will not justify their lawlessness any more that we would justify the lawlessness of a trespasser or thief on the grounds that they "needed" the property they took. Marching in the street, protesting the enforcement of a law does not justify breaking that law. A legal system that rewards lawbreakers is destined to collapse into anarchy. Indeed, those who protested this last week were asking for anarchy; an open border and unlimited immigration. That is dangerous for our country (as 9/11 pointed out), and extremely shortsighted.

Our immigration laws may be complicated, but that does not justify ignoring them. We should enforce those laws, and, if the enforcement proves that the laws are unworkable, then you look at changing the law. But until that happens, the laws should stand, and they should be enforced.

I say we protest the real old fashion way with pitch forks and torches. :evil:

On May 1st, 2006 as a result of the Mexican boycott, national retailers reported 4.2% lower sales for the day, with a 67.8% reduction in shoplifting.

Buenos Dias!

A Letter from a Slave to an Illegal Alien
by Herman Cain

Dear Illegal Alien,

My ancestors were brought to this country in chains against their will, and sold and forced to work like common farm animals. They had to abide by the laws to stay alive.

My ancestors endured abuse and unlawful deaths for 250 years before the civilized hearts of this nation recognized that "all men are created equal," regardless of race or color. We went from slaves to free men and women, but without the freedom of equal rights, equal access to opportunity and equal protection under our nation's laws. That struggle took another 100 years, culminating with the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Throughout my ancestors' 350-year struggle the objective was always "one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all." When that liberty and justice finally became legally recognized as our civil rights, some of us ran through the doors of opportunity, some walked, and some chose to stay on the outside to criticize and complain. Still, our nation's history has always been defined by one set of laws, one language and one flag of unity. This is what defines the United States of America!

Therein lies your biggest problem. The public perception is that you want a different set of laws, and you want to ignore current laws. You even want an accommodation of your language in our national anthem, and some of your people are flaunting flags other than the flag of the USA.

As a reminder, USA stands for United States of America. It does not stand for "Under Special Assumptions."

There is no doubt that the USA is a nation of immigrants -- legal immigrants. No one faults you for desiring the opportunity for a better life in the greatest country in the world. Although we do not consider your demonstrations a civil rights movement, there are some lessons you could learn from our 350-year struggle that may help you in your quest to come out of our nation's shadows.

First, your illegal status is a non-starter for obtaining rights, benefits or a short cut to citizenship. It is creating massive public resentment and alienating those with compassionate hearts who might want to support a reasonable and fair road to your citizenship. You will not earn U.S. citizenship as long as you choose to ignore our laws, simply because you have been able to survive here illegally for a number of years.

Granted, our immigration system is cumbersome, inefficient and needs major overhaul, but it is a part of our system of laws. Maybe one of your objectives should be to encourage Congress to overhaul the system, making the process more efficient for every immigrant, which would make it easier and more efficient for you.

Second, your objectives are unclear, and your leadership uncertain. My ancestors' objectives have always been crystal clear, even when our leadership had been questionable, as it is today. Not every so-called "leader" capable of attracting media attention represents African-Americans' best interests. One of our greatest leaders was, obviously, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. during the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Today, unfortunately, African-Americans are leadership-challenged, despite the great progress we have made. Beware of your leaders and those that would mislead you.

Third, get with the program on our use of the English language and respect and allegiance for our one flag. Second languages exist and are respected in many ethnic communities, but they learn the Star Spangled Banner in English. Our soldiers fight and die for one flag. Patriotism is alive and well in this country, just as it was when this nation was founded, and it will stay that way.

Your journey toward the full rights of U.S. citizenship may not take 350 years, but it will take clarity of purpose, certainty of leadership and a lawful, patriotic approach toward attaining the best that this nation has to offer. In this spirit of coming to our great country, you will eventually hear 300 million legal citizens say, "Welcome to America."

Hey, what do you call a mexican who flys a plane? :-D

PILOT, you racists BASTARD! :x

I hope that's not directed at me, not having a racist bone in my body...  I respect everyone, be they black, white, pink or purple, male or female.  I believe in equal pay for equal work, and the ability to work has nothing to do with the color of your skin, religion, or heritage.  Intelligence comes from your education and experience, not from your race.  Most jobs in this country don't require a penis to perform them, so women can do pretty much anything men can do.

Laziness, on the other hand, may be an inherited trait from your parents.  If your father was a welfare-receiving couch potato, chances are you will be, too...  If your father was a PMEL tecnician, chances are you're a smart kid with a work ethic.

Quote from: docbyers on 05-15-2006 -- 11:13:32
I hope that's not directed at me, not having a racist bone in my body...  I respect everyone, be they black, white, pink or purple, male or female.  I believe in equal pay for equal work, and the ability to work has nothing to do with the color of your skin, religion, or heritage.  Intelligence comes from your education and experience, not from your race.  Most jobs in this country don't require a penis to perform them, so women can do pretty much anything men can do.

Laziness, on the other hand, may be an inherited trait from your parents.  If your father was a welfare-receiving couch potato, chances are you will be, too...  If your father was a PMEL tecnician, chances are you're a smart kid with a work ethic.

Simmer down, Doc, simmer down! It wasn't directed at no body! Just a lil humor!

That's cool.  I just wanted you to understand where I'm coming from...

My father raised me to NOT be a bigot or a racist, and prejudice is not allowed in our family.  I've had my doubts about Marines in the past, but by and large they have proven to be steadfast and true, so my doubts were unfounded... :-D

Now, I wouldn't let Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) in my house, or within 100 meters of my children, but hopefully that doesn't make me a racist, just a protective father...

The only race that I don't like are Arabs. It's not a skin color thing. It's a 9/11 thing. let me clear things up. It's not Arabs, it's Islamic poeple ( which are all just about Arab ).  Yes it is true that I have a deep bitter hate for all Islamic believers. I don't think that muslims have any place in the U.S. military. There has been 8 muslim chaplins in the U.S. military that has been convicted of spying and lets not forget about the muslim soldier that threw a grenade into his higher ups tent in Kuwait just before the invasion. Just look at them if they don't have "infidals" to kill then they are killing each other. I am not labeling them, they are doing that all by themselves. I believe the world would be a better place without Islam. I am not Jewish, but I am very Pro-Isreal. I say we help God's chosen people by wiping their enemy off the map. All of them! :x

I don't disagree with FDC too much, but being a practicing Christian and an American, I believe that any religion has the right to practice its beliefs- to a point.  If you don't agree with my religion, I don't get to kill you.  I wish the Islamic people felt the same way...  I worship the same God they do; I just call Him a different name, and get His word from a different book, so what's the big deal?  His Son never told me to go out and kill people if they don't subscribe to my beliefs.

FDC's solution is simplistic, effective, and would solve a great deal of the world's problems.  Unfortunately it'll never happen.  Every now and then a Crusade isn't a bad idea, but they've seldom worked before, so we have to try something else.  Hopefully Dr. Rice will think of something; she's pretty smart.

Doc, if you are a Christian then you know that the " Wicked People" that the Old Testament refers to are Arabs today. I also do not like to correct people, but I think you misspoke about their God and Your God are the same. I beg to differ, Allah is not the same God. The Koran (Quran) clarifies this. It is a common mistake made among Christians that Allah and Jehovah are the same. I also understand where you are coming from in that they say they believe the books of Moses. However, that is not completely true either. They have perverted the book of Genesis in order for them to claim the birth right. Remember, God Himself instructed Isreal to kill these very people because of their wickedness. God even said for Isreal to kill their animals.

You're absolutely correct.  Remember, it all started with Isaac and Ishmael...

Stop crying Flynn.

Bush's Message: I Won't Enforce Laws We Have Until I Get the Laws I Want
by Mac Johnson

President Bush tonight gave a hopeful speech on immigration reform.  And by that I mean he hopes you believe his speech.  Unfortunately for Mr. Bush, and for our nation, the American people no longer trust the leaders of either party to make an earnest effort to enforce the law when it comes to stopping the corruption of illegal immigration.

Perhaps trust is so totally lacking because Mr. Bush has been President now for five years and has done nothing to seriously address the issue of uncontrolled borders until tonight.  Indeed, illegal border infiltration and visa fraud have gotten far worse during his presidency. 

Yet these problems did not seem to bother Mr. Bush until backlash against them threatened his long-desired "temporary" guest-worker program and a stealth amnesty for the 10 million to 20 million immigration criminals already here.  (And bear in mind that legalization, whether we call it "amnesty" or "earned citizenship" or any other name, will allow these 10 million 20 million to bring their extended families into the United States under family reunification laws, so we are really talking about legalizing around 40 million persons, most of whom are not yet in the country at all.)

Or perhaps mistrust of our leaders over "comprehensive" immigration reform is so total because we've been sold that bridge once before.  In 1986, we were told that simply enforcing our existing immigration laws was an unrealistic approach and so we had no choice but to allow Congress to pass a comprehensive reform bill—one that included both increased law enforcement and an amnesty of the 3 million immigration criminals already in America.  Common sense dictated a "carrot and stick" approach, we were told.  Congress gave away the carrots just fine, but somehow it never got around to using the stick.

As a direct result, today our illegal immigration problem has grown from a quaint 3 million to at least 11 million—and by some estimates 20 million.  Far from bringing people "out of the shadows" as was promised, "comprehensive" reform spread the shadow of illegal immigration across the entire nation.  What was mostly a border state problem is now a truly national problem.  Does anyone really believe that applying the same approach today will produce a different result?

The President's promise of enforcement as part of a "comprehensive" plan is thus simply unbelievable in light of past performance.  But worse yet, it is now just plain irresponsible.  Every one of the President's proposals for increased security could be passed quickly, if they were not tied to a guest worker amnesty.  Indeed, all of them could have already been passed and signed into law if they weren't being used as sugar to coat the bitter pill of legalization for millions of illegal aliens.  But the President and Senators John McCain and Teddy Kennedy (as well as others) want the amnesty giveaway so badly that they refuse to allow the Senate to vote on the enforcement measures as a separate bill, as the House of Representatives has done.

Essentially, they have offered the American people a take it or leave it deal: give us our guest worker amnesty, or we will let the whole world across our open borders until you do.  Give us the laws we want, or we will not enforce the laws we already have.

Every month that increased security measures are held up by this game of political chicken, another 30,000 to 50,000 illegal aliens sneak or lie their way into the country.  This number includes the proverbial hardworking and honest laborers, and it also includes fugitives escaping foreign courts, drug smugglers, thieves, rapists, murderers, aspiring welfare defrauders and, very probably, potential terrorists.  Yet the Bush-McCain-Kennedy axis has chosen to allow the dangerous unchecked flow to continue, creating the crisis atmosphere they know is necessary to force through a guest worker amnesty they believe they need to buy the votes of former illegal aliens and the industries that profit from their cheap labor.

If a guest-worker program and amnesty are such good ideas, then why can they not be passed as separate bills, as the increased enforcement measures easily could be?

If increased enforcement, by itself, is doomed to failure, then why do open borders advocates fear it so much?  Shouldn't they simply pass an enforcement bill and show everyone how right they were?  An amnesty could then easily be added later. 

The simple fact is that an enforcement-only approach would work better than any comprehensive bill promising legalization to lawbreakers.  And this is why every proponent of amnesty and guest worker shenanigans is working so hard to see that an enforcement-only bill will never pass—even if that means leaving America's borders wide open as long as it takes to frustrate voters into accepting a comprehensive bill.

The illogic of the comprehensive reform scam can be seen in the numerous self-contradictions the president uttered in support of it in a mere 16-minute speech.

Deporting the 11 million to 20 million illegal aliens already here is simply impossible we are told.  But then in tonight's address the President bragged that we have deported 6 million illegal aliens in just the last five years.  Why is 6 million possible and praiseworthy, but 11 million is a ludicrous impossibility?

The President bragged tonight of his commitment to deporting every illegal alien caught crossing our border.  And then reasoned that we cannot deport those that have been here illegally for a few years.  Why is it good to deport those caught at the border, but wrong to deport those that make it inland and buy a fake ID?  How is the criminal transformed by this illegal stay?

How can the President promise to use all manner of technology—motion sensors, drones, cameras, fences, vehicle barriers—to keep dangerous illegal aliens out, and then argue that those same criminal aliens become indispensable and honorable once past the gizmos?  Why bother to keep out anyone, if they all become wonderful by the time they reach Dallas?

Why, in short, would he have us believe that enforcing immigration laws at the border is a good thing, but we must not enforce immigration laws just a few miles north of the border?

Because you cannot simultaneously argue for earnestly enforcing the immigration laws in our interior and also argue for a guest worker amnesty of the millions of illegal aliens already hiding there. 

And the guest worker amnesty is the only part of the allegedly "comprehensive" bill that the President is actually interested in.  If we support the President's plan, all we can be sure we'll get is the amnesty part—just like 1986.

The only way we can secure our borders is to pass an enforcement-only bill, and then see to it that it is actually enforced.  Our nation's security cannot be held hostage to the politics of amnesty any longer.

I voted for George W. Bush twice. I even work on both elections. I believe this is the only issue that chaps my hide. I totally disagree with him on this subject. His view is not a conservitive one. I agree last night was a political move to persuade us to back this crazy policy. DON"T DO IT. I hope that he comes to his senses, but I doubt it. One thing you can say about Bush is that he sticks to his guns. He won't back down. I am not happy about it at all. :x

I agree.  I'm all for securing the border.  Send in the Guard, the Marines, the 101st Airborne, or all 3 for that matter.  Buy a zillion miles of concertina wire and electrify the damned thing.  Just keep the illegals, the drugs and the terrorists out.  Put a couple squadrons of A-10s out there for border patrol- see that Mexican with the pickup truck full of illegals?  Empty the front cannon magazine on the truck, and see what affect the depleted uranium rounds have...

Amnesty?  No way.  Ship the illegals back home.  If they want to come back, let them do it legally, and we'll welcome them with open arms.

Quote from: flew-da-coup on 05-15-2006 -- 12:51:30
The only race that I don't like are Arabs. It's not a skin color thing. It's a 9/11 thing. let me clear things up. It's not Arabs, it's Islamic poeple ( which are all just about Arab ).  Yes it is true that I have a deep bitter hate for all Islamic believers. I don't think that muslims have any place in the U.S. military. There has been 8 muslim chaplins in the U.S. military that has been convicted of spying and lets not forget about the muslim soldier that threw a grenade into his higher ups tent in Kuwait just before the invasion. Just look at them if they don't have "infidals" to kill then they are killing each other. I am not labeling them, they are doing that all by themselves. I believe the world would be a better place without Islam. I am not Jewish, but I am very Pro-Isreal. I say we help God's chosen people by wiping their enemy off the map. All of them! :x

Coup,
I used to feel the same way until I started working in an Arabic country. American people need to realize that Isalm is just Christiany. Just has you have Bapispts, Mormons, Catholics, etc, you have many branches of Isalm...

The Muslims I work with and everyone I talk to over there (U.A.E) are very saddened and angry of what these terrorist are going. according to the Quron, it is an unforgivible sin to commit sucide. The good Muslims believe that these terrorist are being deceived and are going to hell.

The Armerican public only sees what the MEDIA tells them. That's all the see is TERRORIST and ISALM being said together in the same sentence. The government controls the media, therefore controlling the thouights of the people. I do beleive that Bush has different motives for being over there and I beleive that there is more to 9/11 that we are not being told. For instance, how come you never seen any video of an airplane hitting the Pentagon? All those survillence camrams and no footage released? How come the impact hole on the world trade was a 16 foot CIRCULR hole with no wing impact marks? How come there was no aircraft wreckage at the since? How come the World Trade came down in a similiar fashion that demolications crews blow up old buildings? How come firefighters inside the world trade said they could hear multiple explosions from within the building to support this claim? How come you can actually see windows being blown out a couple of floors below the actual building falling...Don't get me started...

The truth is that you always have your bad apples in every branch. I'm flying out tomorrow for 6 weeks to go to the UAE. These guys are very cool, but on the real, I still don't trust them :-D   

Their book does say to kill the infidel. I am the infidel. They can say what ever they want, but the fact remains that if they believe their book then they want to kill me. It's not from the media, it's from their book of death. The American media are the ones that came running to the Muslims defense after 9/11. They are not the ones painting Islam bad in our country. Muslims are doing that themselves. Islamic believers believe in peace, but not with Americans. They always say they don't hate Americans and I call BULL$h!t. It's in their book and if they believe their book then they are enemies and if they don't hate us then they are not real muslims. Also, Christians and muslims are not the same. Two different books and two different gods. Don't be fooled by their lies. I am sure that the people you worked with were happy on 9/11 too. The muslim world rejoiced that day. Look at the media in the country you work in. It's the media outlet for the terrorist. They are the ones Bin Laden sends all his tapes too. His message would not make any impact if it was not heard and the media there ( in the very country you work ) are the ones who give him and other terrorist leaders a voice. My ass they like the U.S. . There own media is Bin Ladens soap box.  The easiest enemy to kill is your friend. Of course they are going to treat you nice. So did Hannable Lector. If you recall that 2 of the terrorist were " nice and friendly" according to the people that knew them here in the U.S. DON"T BUY THE BULL CRAP.

I hope your joking about the 9/11 conspiracy. To believe the U.S. Government is behind any of this is paraniod thinking. I know you are joking about it, but there are stupid people out there that actually think that we did this to ourselves, even though the whole ordeal on flight 93 was recorded. For these people to make these assumptions of the U.S. having been behind (9/11 ) is absolutly un-American. Then again we are talking about people who also believe in UFO's and listen to Art Bell on the radio and believe everyone on his show is telling the truth.

I just saying....

I love you, man! :-D

No fo real, I think there's more to it. I'll send you this link. check it out, that's all I ask....

Now, you aren't going to want to drink beer and cry with me are you? :-D

I just received this email from a friend and thought it was too good not to post:

"Recently large demonstrations have taken place across the country protesting the fact that Congress is finally addressing the issue of illegal immigration.

Certain people are angry that the U.S. might protect its own borders, might make it harder to sneak into this country and, once here, to stay indefinitely. Let me see if I correctly understand the thinking behind these protests:

Let's say I break into your house.

Let's say that when you discover me in your house, you insist that I leave. But I say, "I've made all the beds and washed the dishes and did the laundry and swept the floors; I've done all the things you don't like to do. I'm hard-working and honest (except for when I broke into your house)."

According to the protesters, not only must you let me stay, you must add me to your family's insurance plan and provide other benefits to me and to my family (my husband will do your yard work because he too is hard-working and honest, except for that breaking in part).

If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house carrying signs that proclaim my right to be there. It's only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I'm just trying to better myself. I'm hard-working and honest . um, except for ...
well, you know.

And what a deal it is for me!! I live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness, prejudice and being anti-housebreaker.

Did I miss anything? Does this sound reasonable to you? If it does, grab a sign and go picket something. If this sounds insane to you, call your senators and enlighten them because they are stumbling in the darkness right now and really need your help."

Illegal Immigrants Poem

I cross ocean,
poor and broke,
Take bus,
see employment folk.

Nice man treat me
good in there,
Say I need to
see welfare.

Welfare say,
"You come no more,
We send cash
right to your door."

Welfare checks,
they make you wealthy,
Medicaid it keep
you healthy!

By and by,
I got plenty money,
Thanks to you,
American dummy.

Write to friends
in motherland,
Tell them 'come
fast as you can.'

They come in turbans
and Ford trucks,
I buy big house
with welfare bucks

They come here,
we live together,
More welfare checks,
it gets better!

Fourteen families,
they moving in,
But neighbor's patience
wearing thin.

Finally, white guy
moves away,
Now I buy his house,
and then I say,

"Find more aliens
for house to rent."
And in the yard
I put a tent.

Send for family
they just trash,
But they, too,
draw the welfare cash!

Everything is
very good,
And soon we
own the neighborhood.

We have hobby
it's called breeding,
Welfare pay
for baby feeding.

Kids need dentist?
Wife need pills?
We get free!
We got no bills!

American crazy!
He pay all year,
To keep welfare
running here.

We think America
darn good place!
Too darn good for
the white man race.

If they no like us,
they can scram,
Got lots of room in
Pakistan.

That makes me feel warm and fuzzy all over. Some people call this feeling RAGE. Do away with welfare!

The hot debate lately has been over immigration or more specifically illegal immigration.  People that cross our border into the United States without the proper paperwork are illegal.  They are breaking the law.  They are NOT undocumented workers.  They are NOT day laborers.  They are illegal aliens.

If you stand up and say this, you are labeled as a racist.  Race has absolutely nothing to do with the opposition to people illegally entering our country.  I am all for immigration.  I understand why people around the world would want to come and live in the United States.  This continues to be the land of opportunity.  We have more freedoms and opportunities than any other nation on Earth.  We are a nation of laws as well.  We welcome people from any race, any nation, any heritage, any religion as long as you come here legally.

We all saw the protests.  We saw the Mexican flags waving.  We saw the signs.  The protesters did more damage to their cause than they did good.  The demonstration organizers are already feeling the backlash.  If there are more protests, don't be surprised to see American flags.  But I say it would be too little too late.  We already saw the true colors the first time and they were not red, white and blue.  They were red, white and green....the colors of the Mexican flag.

My  grandmother passed away years ago.  She was an immigrant from Germany.  She came here legally in search of a better life and found it.  What I never knew about her until her funeral was that she helped many other people come over here legally.  There were people at her funeral that I had never seen in my life.   I didn't know who they were until they got up and spoke.  One woman in particular stands out as she spoke.  She was giving her tear-filled thanks to my grandmother for helping to bring her and her family to the Untied States.  She evidently helped many people from her old country to come to this country.  She helped them learn English.  She helped them to assimilate to this country.  She helped them become Americans.  She was proud to be here and she was proud that she became an American.  She never forgot her heritage.  When she got mad, she slipped back to yelling in her native tongue.  She still continued to cook dishes from her native land.  But she also built a life upon her new country and it's heritage.

Too many people that immigrate to this country, especially illegally, make no effort to assimilate in to the American way of life.  They want the advantages that America offers but do not want  the responsibilities that go along with being in this country.  America loves immigrants.  This nation was built on immigration.  All we ask is that you come here legally and you assimilate to our way of life.  Do not expect us to assimilate to your way of life.  After all, if your country's way of life was so great, you would never have come to America in the first place.

Man Doc, where do you come up with all this great stuff?

I shamelessly plagiarize from a host of sources.  You don't think I got this brilliant watching CNN, do you?

I know a lot of it has been quoted. I just can't find the could ones like you. :?

SE PUEDE GET TWO YEARS TAX-FREE!
by Ann Coulter
May 31, 2006

If Congress adopts the Bush plan and gives amnesty to illegal aliens, Senate Republicans will be asking President Cheney for a pardon.

Bush wants to grant illegal aliens amnesty while sounding like he's really cracking down on them. It tells you where Americans stand on illegal immigration that Bush has to pull the Democrat trick of hiding from the public what he really believes when it comes to immigration.

The "path to citizenship" that Bush and the Senate are trying to pawn off on Americans requires that illegals pay huge fines and back taxes, with "huge" being defined as a $2,000 fine and taxes for three of the last five years. Even with the special "Two Years Tax-Free" package for illegals, this is about as likely as me paying my dad back the money I "borrowed" from him when I was in college.

We're told illegal immigrants are dying to pay taxes if only they can become citizens. Oh by the way, they also will have a panoply of government benefits available to them if they become citizens — in fact, even if they get green cards. They're probably unaware of this and are just dying to send half their paychecks to the government just like us shiftless, lazy Americans.

Inasmuch as most of these low-skilled immigrant workers are in the 0 percent tax bracket, this should be a real boon for the U.S. Treasury. Indeed, the government may end up paying the illegals money: "Let's see, Juan. According to our records, you owe us 0 percent for the past three years, and because you qualify for the earned-income tax credit, we actually owe you! Are 20s OK?"

The Senate bill also forgives illegal aliens who have committed identity theft by stealing American Social Security numbers to get jobs.

So in addition to the Two Years Tax-Free plan for illegals, they get one free felony. Also, illegal immigrants from Mexico qualify for affirmative action, allowing them to get into U.S. colleges with lower grades and scores than Americans.

What's the process for losing your citizenship and becoming an illegal alien?

However hardworking illegal immigrants are when they come here, the moment they become citizens, they will be immediately demagogued by Democrats into viewing welfare as a universal human right, just as they now view living in America.

Of course illegal immigrants will "work for less." They don't have to pay taxes at all now, and under Bush's plan they will have to pay taxes for only — at most — three of the last five years. Not only that, but illegal aliens don't require their employers to comply with OSHA regulations, overtime and minimum wage laws, unemployment insurance, disability laws, the Family and Medical Leave Act, a slew of oppressive environmental regulations, and 4 million other ways the government has developed to make it extremely expensive to hire legal employees.

Instead of creating a separate class of citizens who are immune from oppressive government rules, how about relieving all of us — even us shiftless Americans — from the cost of government?

I thought all these trade agreements the free-trade fetishists have pushed on us over the years already allowed corporations to take advantage of cheap labor in other countries — countries that don't have the panoply of oppressive government regulations that make it so expensive to hire American workers. Doesn't NAFTA already allow us to buy inexpensive goods made by Mexicans in Mexico?

In addition to discriminating against American citizens in favor of illegal immigrants, Bush wants to continue our immigration policy of massively discriminating against immigrants who live farther than walking distance from the United States. America's immigration laws are applied only to immigrants who are separated from the U.S. by an ocean. But if they live near the border and can run across it, they're in.

Even if one accepts Bush's theory that we need more immigrants to do the jobs that lazy, shiftless Americans won't do, isn't it possible that Korean immigrants, Italian immigrants or Indian immigrants would work hard too? But they can't run across the border to America, so they're out of luck. (Unless you are spokesmen for the Taliban, in which case there's a seat waiting for you at Yale.)

Since when did conservatives start encouraging people to walk more? What are we, a bunch of Al Gores now?

COPYRIGHT 2006 ANN COULTER

This whole thing just pisses me off. My president just went libral on me and the Republican controlled senate is a libral institution now. What the hell is happening? The death to our economy is coming with this Amnesty bullcrap. I have a message for the Senate and the president: Up yours!!! you traitors!!!!!   :x :x :x

Hoopty should copy this whole thread and email it to the White House; I really believe we reflect the opinion of the majority of Americans when we say "No" to amnesty; enforce the laws on the books, and build the fence on the border.  The President, and his advisors, have not thought the issue out all the way.  The economic impact of amnesty will have a ripple-effect for decades to come...  Not to mention that it's just not fair to the legal immigrants that have gone through the process, learned English, and know U.S. history better than a native...

This is not a liberal or conservative thing; it's not Republican or Democrat; it's common sense, and doing the right thing, and GWB and the Senate just aren't with the program...

Hell, I'll second that.  Send this thread to White House.  I don't want those freeloading criminals staying in our country.

By the way, where did you get that last article from Doc?  I've only read a little Ann Coulter, but I like her.

Check out http://anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi (http://anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi)

Senate Immigration Bill Is Skunk in a Bow
by James R. Edwards, Jr.

The Republican House of Representatives should tell the U.S. Senate -- and the Bush White House -- to take a hike on immigration.

The GOP-led House has been handed a skunk wrapped in a bow. That stinking varmint, S. 2611, amounts to a liberal, Democrat bill.

Instead of obliging the cynical pansies of the Senate and the administration who keep pushing open-borders policies, the House should simply refuse to name conferees. That is, House Republicans should boldly snub their noses -- very publicly -- at their party's turncoats.

Otherwise, the GOP House faces a no-win situation in a conference committee charged with reconciling two immigration bills as different as night and day.

The best course for the House majority, if it hopes to retain Republican control this November, lies in shouting "No deal!" and slamming the door to bargaining behind closed doors. The House should stick to its guns and insist on its enforcement-only approach as the only thing worth discussing.

Enforcement is the true "rational middle ground" on which there's any agreement. But flacks for Big Business, Big Labor, Big Religion and the Far Left hold enforcement hostage. It's leverage to force acceptance of amnesty-guestworker schemes.

In the end, no immigration bill is better -- for the country, for conservatives and for the Republican Party -- than anything that could possibly emanate from a conference committee trying to marry up H.R. 4437 and S. 2611.

Why not attempt to hammer out a House-Senate compromise? For several reasons, but first consider some facts.

The Senate's Hagel-Specter-Martinez "compromise" amnesty bill is in fact a liberal product. While the vast majority of Democrats (38) voted for it, only about 40% of Senate Republicans (23) supported its passage.

Doesn't it tell us something when Teddy Kennedy enthusiastically supports this bill?

Nearly 60% of Senate Republicans (32) opposed S. 2611. Ten of the 14 GOP Senators who face re-election this year voted against the bill, and three of the four Democrats who cast "no" votes stand for re-election this time.

S. 2611 includes several amnesty measures. It legalizes some 85% of the 10 million to 12 million illegal aliens, even rewarding their lawbreaking with U.S. citizenship. It amnesties employers who broke the law by hiring illegal aliens. It contains a DREAM Act amnesty for illegal aliens under 18 years of age and a special amnesty for illegal farm workers.

The bill creates a new "guestworker" program in which the "guests" (some of whom are illegal aliens whose status it launders) will never leave the country. This is President Bush's "any willing worker" plan. It sets up a dynamic where no willing American could ever accept the artificially depressed wage rate being offered, so cheap foreign labor always gets the job.

Proponents unfailingly fail to mention that native-born American unemployment in the very job sectors with the most foreign workers (e.g., agriculture, restaurants, construction) is twice the national average. Millions more American workers have been forced from the labor market because they can no longer find employment in their fields.

When the average Mexican worker earns 1/12th the wage of the average American worker and 4.6 billion people in the world earn less than the average Mexican, that makes for a lot of "willing workers."

Further, S. 2611's enforcement provisions don't measure up to the House's. The immigration lawyers' lobby drafted much of S. 2611 (creating an "immigration lawyers' full employment act"). "Enforcement" sections actually tie the hands of law enforcement -- one provision even requiring the United States effectively to get Mexico's permission before building border barriers or taking enforcement actions.

So, what do these facts mean for House Republicans? They mean House Republicans will be outgunned in a conference committee. Everybody else -- House and Senate Democrats and Senate Republican conferees -- will gang up on the GOP House conferees. And the White House, while not formally part of the conference, will arm-twist for the open-borders, pro-amnesty side.

If Senate GOP conferees reflected the majority of Republican Senators, they would side with House majority conferees. But Sen. Bill Frist has already tipped his hand. He intends to name "Republican" conferees who mostly reflect Democrats' instead of his own party's views.

The very fact House Republicans are negotiating with the amnesty crowd will further depress the Republican base. The reputable polls all show the public overwhelmingly favors the House's enforcement-only approach and opposes amnesty-guestworker.

If they name conferees, it will appear House Republicans are selling out America. That will further depress turnout this fall by the voters the GOP desperately needs to show up on Election Day.

Midterm elections historically go poorly for the party that holds the White House -- and second-term midterms tend to be the harshest.

To keep the House in Republican hands, the key is for the House majority to hand back to President Bush and the Senate their amnesty-guestworker skunk.

You can't wall off immigrants
Fortified borders won't withstand the forces of supply and demand.

By Wayne A. Cornelius, WAYNE A. CORNELIUS is director of the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies at UC San Diego

May 28, 2006


BOTH THE SENATE and House versions of an immigration bill to keep unauthorized migrants out of the United States rely on the construction of hundreds of miles of new physical barriers, high-tech gadgetry and more manpower along the Southwestern border. But from Western Europe to the Far East, the evidence shows that anything short of complete militarization of borders will not deter illegal entry by determined, economically motivated migrants. Partial militarization only rechannels illegal migration, it doesn't reduce it overall. If the probability of apprehension isn't uniformly high, migrants will continue to cross in areas where risk of detection remains relatively low.

The latest case is Spain. Since the mid-1980s, the country has become a major destination and transit country for Third World migrants, especially from Africa and Latin America. But illegal immigration only became a crisis last fall, when waves of sub-Saharan Africans began jumping the fences that separate Ceuta and Melilla, Spain's small territorial enclaves on the North African coast, from Morocco.

In response, the Spanish government doubled the height of the fences and installed high-tech monitoring equipment to create the world's most elaborate electronic border-surveillance system. It also diplomatically pressured the Moroccan government to mobilize its police forces to stop migrants from using the country as an exit point.

The assaults on the border fortifications in Ceuta and Melilla followed Spain's installation of advanced radar-detection equipment and stepped-up maritime patrols in the Strait of Gibraltar. African migrants were crossing the nine-mile strait in small, grossly overloaded rubber rafts that often capsized in the rough waters, drowning their passengers. Spanish officials boasted that the new technology and added patrols made the country's southern borders "watertight."

But almost immediately, prospective migrants and the smugglers who assist them shifted their efforts toward the Atlantic. Spain's Canary Islands became their new destination. This was a much longer and more dangerous passage — a voyage of 100 miles from the Moroccan coast in often heavy seas. When the Moroccan government moved to shut down this route, migrant departure points shifted south to Mauritania, a journey of 600 miles to the Canary Islands. After another flurry of Spanish diplomatic activity, Mauritanian authorities began cracking down, which pushed embarkations farther south, to Senegal, a 900-mile voyage.

Despite the perilous, eight- to 10-day ocean crossing in flimsy wooden boats, sub-Saharan migrants continue to sail for the Canary Islands in record numbers. About 8,000 migrants have been apprehended so far this year, nearly double the total in 2005. Humanitarian organizations estimate 2,000 more have perished at sea.

In the face of the African exodus, the Spanish government continues to focus on intercepting migrants before they arrive or making their journey as difficult as possible. Spain does not have a guest worker program big enough to allow for an orderly, legal flow of African workers into its economy. Although the Socialist government of Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero last year legalized about 600,000 migrants who had been working in the country without authorization, there has been no systematic crackdown on employers who hire illegals, thus assuring that this workforce will grow again.

Spain is losing the battle for immigration control for two reasons. First, the real-income gap between Spain and sub-Saharan Africa is huge and growing, not so much because the migrant-sending countries are economically stagnant but because Spain's economy continues to outperform all other European Union countries. Unemployment has dropped dramatically since 1996, and native-born Spaniards overwhelmingly spurn the jobs done by foreign workers. Second, Spain is aging so rapidly that by 2030 its population will be the second oldest in the world, after Japan's, and replacement workers are urgently needed.

Spain's experience should be a cautionary tale for immigration reformers in the United States. Hardly anyone questions the efficacy of pouring ever more resources into border enforcement, which we have been doing since 1993, even as the population of illegal immigrants has nearly tripled.

The problem with fortifying borders is that it doesn't reduce the forces of supply and demand that drive illegal immigration. The Senate last week approved 370 miles of new double- and triple-layered fencing and 500 miles of vehicle barriers. In December, the House voted for 700 miles of new fortifications. If built, these new layers of protection will have no discernible effect on reducing the flow of illegal migrants from Mexico.

But these enhancements will enable smugglers to charge more for their services; divert crossings to more remote and dangerous areas, increasing migrant fatalities; induce more migrants and their family members to settle permanently here; and cause more crossings through legal ports of entry using false or borrowed documents.

The outcome might be different if we were prepared to accept the huge economic and diplomatic costs of militarizing 100% of our land borders with Mexico and Canada, as well as the Pacific and Gulf coasts, and the long-term expense of monitoring the fortifications. But polls say most Americans are leery of this approach. Even as part of a "comprehensive" immigration reform package, anything less than a full-blown Fortress America makes no sense, except as a symbolic reward to xenophobes.

Very interesting!  The author makes some good, valid points...

I look at the fence issue this way:

Let's say I have a 1,000-mile border with no wall or barrier.  Let's say I have 1,000 border patrol agents guarding it.  If I construct a barrier fence for 500 miles, I can decrease the number of guards to, say, 750, with the majority on the 500 miles of un-fenced border, and the rest on the fenced portion.  The theory is I'll have less crossings on the fenced area, funnelling them more to the unfenced area where I have good staffing to watch for it.

It's an old ground force military strategem- force the enemy to go to the ground you choose.  If I have 500 miles of border that's a pain to guard because of terrain, for example, I'll wall that off so I can more easily guard the other 500 miles that's easier for me to manage.  If I want to stop a Cuban invasion I'll camp out in southeast Florida, not cover the whole coastline...

At any rate, I don't know how much good a fence will do, but it might slow them down a little, and force them to try un-fenced areas where we can increase the staffing without raising the border patrol budget through the roof.  The fence is, after all, a band-aid.  It doesn't fix the problem of why they come here in the first place- there's work and money here that they can't find in Mexico.  I agree with the author that fortified borders won't withstand the forces of supply and demand.

You don't see too many Canadians jumping over the border at night, because they actually have an economy in Canada, unlike our neighbors to the south...

I don't have a problem with the cubans. They are escaping a communist government. All the ones I know are stronger patriots than most born here in the U.S.

Birthright Sale
by Thomas Sowell

Many stores held sales over the Memorial Day holidays. In Washington, the Senate immigration bill has been selling our birthright for a message of political pottage.

Far from "controlling the borders" as advertised, this bill reduces our existing control of the borders. Under a provision inserted at the eleventh hour by Senator Arlen Specter, the Senate bill forbids the federal government from building a fence without first consulting with the Mexican government.

In fact, state and local governments are also forbidden by this bill to take any border control actions without first consulting with their Mexican counterparts. In other words, if the city of San Diego wants to put up any sort of barriers, it would have to consult with the municipal authorities in Tijuana before doing so.

This legislation was never about border control. The laws already on the books at this very moment allow us to control the borders, to build any fence we choose, without consulting the government of Mexico.

The laws already on the books allow any illegal alien to be arrested and expelled. Those laws are simply not being enforced. If a Los Angeles policeman arrests an illegal alien and reports him to the federal authorities, it is the Los Angeles cop who will be in big trouble.

Border Patrol agents can knock themselves out capturing people trying to enter the country illegally but nothing happens to most of those people, even the ones organizing the smuggling of people and drugs into this country.

An Associated Press dispatch reports: "The vast majority of people caught smuggling immigrants across the border near San Diego are never prosecuted for the offense, demoralizing the Border Patrol agents, according to an internal document obtained by the Associated Press."

In other words, we have make-believe border control and the current Senate legislation will weaken even that, all the while talking about "tough" enforcement. That "tough" enforcement is a promise but legalizing illegal aliens is immediate and irrevocable and its consequences irreversible and lasting far into the future.

"Border control" is just political cover for legalizing illegal aliens. The two things are put together in a package deal that is like horse-and-rabbit stew, whose ingredients are one horse and one rabbit. Border control is the rabbit.

The word games played about "amnesty" deliberately confuse the issue of violations of American law with the issue of acquiring American citizenship.

The fact that the Senate bill has requirements -- described as "tough," like everything else -- for acquiring citizenship is irrelevant to the question of letting the violations of law go unpunished.

Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation, who has over the years done some of the most incisive analysis of census and other statistical data, projects the actual consequences of legalizing the existing illegal alien population in the United States to extend far beyond the 12 million estimated to be here now.

These 12 million people are not test tube babies. They have parents and they will have children. Nor are their other family members likely to be kept out after the illegals are made legal.

Over the following 20 years, Dr. Rector projects that the real increase in this population living in the United States to be 103 million, not the 12 million that everyone is talking about.

This is one of the most reckless gambles with the future of this nation ever taken by supposedly responsible members of Congress. The idea that we must consult with Mexico before controlling our own borders is staggering -- and revealing.

The Mexican government has already shown its utter contempt for our laws by publishing booklets advising its citizens how to enter the United States illegally and how to take advantage of American welfare state provisions.

Mexican president Vicente Fox has even had the nerve to warn that his "friendship" with the United States is at risk if we pass immigration laws he doesn't like. Consulting with his government is truly putting Vicente Fox in charge of the hen house.

Screw the Mexican President ( Fox ). Mexico is a waste land.

Quote from: flew-da-coup on 06-07-2006 -- 05:03:59
Screw the Mexican President ( Fox ). Mexico is a waste land.

You heard it here fist. Coup wants to screw the Mexican President. :-o

No I was telling you to screw him.

Well you should have just said so. Anyways, I only like women, you homo. :-D

he is a woman.

 :-o :-o :-o :-o :-o :-o

Let's just throw crap on him like monkeys.

Since hearing the plan for treating illegal immigrants as "guest" workers, I now have undergone a complete reversal in my understanding of the proper meaning of words.

I stupidly used to believe that the definition of "guest" is one who is invited.  Now I am told this is no longer correct. For instance, if a burglar breaks into my home, he really becomes a guest who is only looking for a better life.  Because he broke in for that reason, I must accept the obligation to provide health care, education, transportation, and living quarters.

I feel so much better now...

Good catch Doc, never would have realized that.  Wow, that does make me stop and think.  Does this mean we need a new dictionary?

I'll leave it to the college professors to write that dictionary; me and Coup will stick with the old one...

Someone enters my house without permission, they WILL be a "guest-" at the local ER!  One Norwegian Elkhound and a shotgun later, they may regret being un-invited...

Someone who enters my country un-invited should have the full benefit of our legal system, meaning they should be arrested, prosecuted, and deported, and when they leave, I hope the friendly INS agent smiles and waves and says "Come back when you have the right paperwork."

An Illegal Alien Is Not an Immigrant
by Paul Oreffice

As Congress continues to debate two ludicrous "immigration" bills, illegal aliens continue to deluge American borders.

If Congress is going to make any progress, it is imperative to begin by using the proper terminology, namely, an illegal alien is not an immigrant. The U.S. does not have an "immigration" problem. An immigrant is a person who obtains an immigration visa from a U.S. Consulate, expresses a wish to become a U.S. citizen, and abides by the law.

The problem Americans are facing is one of ILLEGAL ALIENS, not immigrants -- brought about by total neglect of the U.S. government throughout several decades. Democratic and Republican administrations alike have allowed the Immigration and Naturalization Service to become a bureaucracy that makes it difficult for legitimate people to come to this country but does precious little to stop the illegal aliens.

As a direct result of misusing the word "immigrants," Congress is creating a negative connotation of immigrants. This results in a prejudicial mindset, causing Americans turn against immigrants in general, not just illegals. This is a terrible disservice to a country that has prospered for more than two centuries by allowing hardworking immigrants to assimilate and aid in the overall prosperity of American society.

In theory, the House bill will send 12 million illegal aliens back to their native countries. Just how does the government expect to find them? In addition, the Senate bill lacks the wherewithal to effectively enforce its agenda. The bill will reward the worst transgressors, those who have cheated for the longest period of time and send back illegal aliens who have been here less than two years. Again, how are we going to find them? Do the esteemed senators expect those here for a short time to say, "I have been here only one year, please send me back?"

To effectively control the illegal alien problem threatening our country, I propose a three pronged approach:

1- Strengthen America's borders
2- Revamp the utterly inefficient INS, by allocating a tough businessman to strip it down and begin anew
3- Create a guest-worker program.

I listen as my fellow conservatives (including those at HUMAN EVENTS) scream that creating such a program to "cleanse" the illegals would be tantamount to amnesty. But amnesty would be giving illegal aliens an immediate pardon. In contrast, a guest-worker program is akin to placing illegal aliens on probation, giving them a chance to clean their record over a period spanning many years.

Why should the U.S. government grant a probationary period, allowing illegal aliens to prove themselves? The answer is simple. America needs them! Without the 12 million illegal aliens our economy would suffer a mighty blow. Who would we find to take the jobs in construction, hotels, restaurants, and gardening, which these men and women are doing effectively?

The charge is often heard that American businesses are willfully hiring illegals. In most cases this is just not true; instead, employers may be hiring illegals unwittingly because of the ease with which documents can be forged. The burden of determining the validity of green cards, Social Security cards, and driver's licenses should not fall on employers who lack the means to determine the truth.

The solution is not rocket science. Simply create an ID card that is difficult to forge with a chip embedded in it that all immigrants must carry and present when applying for a job. After this is accomplished, the government should hold employers accountable for hiring illegals, and in turn, punish them if they hire immigrants without proper ID.

The solution exists to solve the problem of illegal aliens now and in the future. To do it, we need a national resolve to force our Congress to be realistic about what the problem truly is, and what needs to be done to effectively solve this epidemic.