Print
Email Friend
Add to Favorites
del.icio.us
Digg It!
Slashdot It!
The hodged together contemptible comprehensive illegal immigration bill is too fragile to survive. The haste to pass the “immigration” betrayal bill was fueled by the certainty that Congress members will get an earful from their real American voting constituency on their two week Memorial Day recess back home. "The world is watching to see how we respond to the current crisis. Let's not disappoint them." said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA), the chief Democratic architect. Senator, you may rest assured that you’re not disappointing them. Our “leaders” Selling America down the river has become predictable. You are, however, disappointing real Americans with your tragic disconnect from them on a domestic issue of no concern to the World.
A Fragile Betrayal
|
Posted By: AZ Moderate Posted on: May. 22, 2007 at 3:51 PM  14 Comments
|
4.3 / 5
Based on 7 ratings.
|
Comments:
|
May. 23, 2007 at 11:26:21 AM
|
|
| So, when Sen John Kyl was going on how if we voted for Jim Pederson, we'd get stuck with an amnesty bill and a guest worker program, I guess he was right. I voted for Pederson, and now we're getting amnesty and guest slaves. I would like to see them insert into the bill an automatic increase in the minimum wage each year. If the economy is so starved for labor, then the laws of supply and demand means that prices for labor are obviously going up, ergo an increase in the minimum wage shouldn't make any difference because wages should be going up. Common sense Econ 101, right? I'm opposed to this crappy bill, but if they can get:
Then it will lead to a better USA. Also, hopefully we can use it to transform Mexico and South America. |
||
|
May. 23, 2007 at 09:38:15 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
| We should not be discussing working consitions for illegal aliens, becasue we shouldn't have any illegals working here. As long as you muddy the water with this bulls*** and not focus on the real problem of closing our border down except at those points where we want to let someone in, then this issue is going to continue. To hell with their working conditions. They broke the law to come here, and the employer broke the law to hire them. If they treat each other like s***, so be it. Both should be in jail, Mexican jails to be precise. |
||
|
May. 24, 2007 at 01:02:19 AM
|
|
| What do we do in the United States when someone breaks the law AA? We punish them proportionate to the offense. Like it or not, illegal immigration is a misdemeanor offense. Presently ICE will ignore the first four apprehensions of an illegal alien, moving to incarceration or deportation only upon the fifth offense. You seem to think the law these people have broken is some kind of high treason, but it is the equivalent of possessing a gram of marijuana of doing 70 mph in a 55 mph speed zone. If you are so hung up on the law-breaking aspect of these illegal immigrants, then you should be happy with this proposed bill. These people living here illegally will have to pony up $5000 to become legal citizens, assuming they meet all other conditions. That's basically a $5000 fine for breaking the law, and once paid, their debt to society is paid just the same as if you paid your $100 photo radar ticket. Now if you want to change the laws on the books and make crossing our border illegally a felony, then get right to it. But until then, get over this "they broke our law!" crap. Like you, or the numbskull Chairman Rany Pullen, or Russell Pierce, I also profoundly dislike this ill-conceived piece of crap immigration bill -- but not because it offers a path to citizenship for hard working people who want to become citizens so much that they will pay a half year's wages to do so. Anyone who can contort that much to hold a US Passport should be stepping to the front on the line: I daresay they'll make finer citizens than many of the lazy blue-blood asses we call our own. But once again, the fundamental issue of addressing the illegal employer - the root of all illegal immigration - is completely unaddressed, and so long as this crime evades felony status, it will continue the endless cycle of illegal immigration and amnesty granting and new illegal immigration, on and on and on again. |
||
|
May. 24, 2007 at 02:44:22 AM
|
|
| Here we are again, talking about immigration. We seem to think that illegal immigration is some kind of racial thing, rather than the problem that it is. Of course, using agenda items, that is phrasing a topic in a highly emotional manner, using fear, religion, moral values and culture to pit one American against another. We never seem to want to solve the problem at it's root. Yes, AA is correct in saying that there should be no illegal workers in this country. However, he has the wrong people going to jail. The root cause of the problem of illegal immigration is that once these people cross into the US, they do not have a hard time finding work. Of course, it is much easier for the politicians to blame the illegal worker, simply because they are the least able to fight back. It is much easier to push emotional buttons by blaming the illegal worker, and they do it through fear. I do not like the entire bill at all. I would like to see much more to keep the employer from hiring the illegal worker. However, no politician wants to take on a real law that punishes the exploiter, and the exploiter wants the politican to use emotional fearmongering so that the people they plan on exploiting will not have the right to protest inhumane treatment. Those employers who hire illegal workers have already shown disregard for the law. They are the ones that (if you want to use the emotional buttons) contribute to the erosion of American culture. The employers of illegal workers are the ones taxing the welfare system because they do not insure that their workers have medical care and do not pay them a living wage. On top of that, they are also linked in the chain of conspiritors because they benefit from the import of cheap, exploitable labour. So, if we are going to charge the illegal immigrant with conspiring to smuggle himself into the US, then we need to go all the way up the chain. Any employer found with illegal workers who smuggled themselves across the border should be charged with conspiricy also. It is time that we loose the rhetoric and propaganda. It is time we stop tring to solve problems by making laws to ease our emotions rather than to deal with the problem. I do not like all of the bill. I see some things I would like changed about it, but it is not a finished product and much more work and debate will go on to get it to the President's desk. I say, it is a start, a comprehensive attempt to solve the problem. No, it is not perfect by any means, but it is a start. PS...if you really think about it, the Republicans might be more upset about the bill because their last strong platform is being pulled from under them by debating immigration now, instead of closer to the election. Just a thought. |
||
|
May. 26, 2007 at 10:14:17 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
| It occurred to me that the Roman Empire had no problem with immigration. In fact Rome itself was a huge drawing card to the inhabitants of the nations within the Roman Empire, and I have never seen a reference to illegal aliens in Rome, or anywhere within the confines of the Roman Empire for that matter. It seems one could come and go pretty much as one pleased within the Roman Empire (although Roman citizenship was bestowed only on the select few by edict and by law). Hmmmm … Perhaps we are missing the point here by trying to protect our national integrity. But then, the Roman Legions conquered and occupied nations (e.g., Jerusalem and pretty much all of the Middle East), or subjugated nations through very real threat of occupation (e.g., Israel, led for a time by King Herod). Perhaps that is where we are going with the American Empire. If we conquer and occupy nations, then we control those nations directly, as well as others on the periphery of the American Empire that are intimidated of if not occupied directly. HmmHmmm… The picture is becoming clear. But … … why are we starting with Iraq rather than Mexico?!? They both have oil, but it is the Mexicans that are invading our territory – not the Iraqis. Seems like a misstep in establishing der neuw verld order, doesn’t it? Oh well, Hail Ignoramus Oblivious Maximus Bush!! Hail yes! Only in America: Imperial Rome? [link:www.voiceofarizona.com] There are so many underlying similarities between America today and Rome at the time of Christ two thousand years ago. Is this the Rome that some say is prophesied to rise again? • Unchallenged military power • Management of resources through puppet rulers • Aggression and garrisoning throughout the known world • Culture-changing commercial influence throughout the known world • Inexorable movement from a representative republic to a concentration of power • A growing tide of barbarians flooding across its southern border threatening to overwhelm it. Oblivoius Maximus and the Company Store [link:www.voiceofarizona.com] |
||
|
|
May. 26, 2007 at 11:10:30 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
| AzMod, I asked that very question of a friend of mine studying Roman History at a California University just a week ago. Did the Romans have an illegal alien problem? His answer, "It wasn't a problem, although they had lots of people coming and going through the Empire. The difference was you had to provide proof of citizenship to own land, open a business, or participate in anything Roman. He wnet on to describe the Roman tax system saying, "Even their tax system was set up to tax citizens at a lower tax rate then non-citizens trading in the Empire." While they were free to come and go pretty much as they wanted, they were never given the same status as citizens living under the laws of the Empire. In order to benefit from the Roman economy, to be able to speak at legislative or town hall meetings and to educate their children in state run schools, they had to first become citizens, which required a sponser and a lot of time, or a bribe (come on, this was Rome). This kept non-Romans from flooding in and taking free benefits they had no right to expect. So while Rome 2000 years ago and America today are very much different, both had different ways of dealing with immigration. Seems to me like the Romans had this down two millenium ago. |
||
|
|
May. 27, 2007 at 12:39:33 AM
|
|
| It is rather telling that the Romans "solved" their immigration problem by giving the non-Romans migrants the same rights as their slaves (minus the fighting to the death part). Not surprisingly, many of the immigrant class in ancient Rome didn't come there voluntarily, but were the captured subjects of conquered nations. But ultimately, the Roman Empire was brought down by illegal immigrants -- they were called Visigoths. |
||
|
|
May. 27, 2007 at 08:52:31 AM
|
|
| On Ancient Rome, the people of conquered lands were initially not Roman citizens, but rather considered provincials, and did not have full citizenship rights, until they joined the Legions, and served for 20 years. So, eventually, Civil Wars were fought to bring the provinces full citizenship. Then the only people who were non-citizens were residents of the non-conquered allied regions, like Egypt, and Sicily, and slaves. The worst part of the present bill is the guest worker part; we're taking the worst aspect of France's and Germany's immigration, but it retains none of what makes immigrants worth having - people who become active "owners" of America. It's just exactly like neighborhoods with large numbers of rental houses - noone cares about garbage, broken windows, abandoned cars, drug houses, meth labs, so the place goes to crap. The other bad part is no real effort to fight illegal employers, no massive increase in fines, and they retain theat s***ty "knowingly hire" loophole, as if an illegal employer is going to document that they've knowingly hired an illegal? And not just go, "I didn't know!" So, therefore we can't possibly cite them, or fine them 'cuz they didn't know. |
||
|
|
May. 27, 2007 at 08:49:23 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
| Well put, Double A. Huzzah Huzzah! Your explanation makes the points I wanted to make, and fell short of. Thanks for the clarification. Perhaps we could learn something from the Romans in this particular case. Yes, MoronInCharge, we are all too familiar with that downside to the Roman Empire. While we can learn much from that very successful civilization, we will hopefully learn from its mistakes as well as its successes. But in examining that epoch, let us not throw the baby out with the bathwater. That is what the NeocoNazis are all about, whether they know it or not. And of course if they know it they will not admit it. The bathwater is their stock in trade. We have to be wise enough and learned enough of history to weed the garden and use the bathwater for its nutrient value. (Sorry about the mixed metaphors, but you know what I mean.) And we should take a lesson from the Goth come Visigoth process in the dissolution of the Classic Roman Empire. The Mexicans are not the Goths, but who knows what may evolve from south of the border? Fail to kill the contemptible illegal immigration bill at the peril of the New American Empire. The lack of commitment to America by much of the invading legions of foot soldiers from across the border is a key point Phadreus. The flood of illegal immigrants from across our southern border is unique in the history of immigration to America. Previous waves of poor immigrants from overseas had to make an irrevocable commitment to America. For them it was not possible to bop back and forth to the old country, however much they may have wanted too. Illegal border crossers from Mexico, on the other hand, don’t have to leave home to come to America. It’s easier to bop back and forth illegally across the border than to make the commitment to America. Their allegiance is to Mexico and the almighty dollar, not to America. And, in large enough numbers, they bring home with them. Ref: "Only in America: Money and Allegiance to Mexico" 03/28/2006 - 7:21 PM [link:www.voiceofarizona.com] |
||
It doesn't matter which side of the aisle you are on or from in this case, both the Dems and Reps have let this nation down on immigration miserably.
40 years of Dem rule in Congress, 12 of Republican rule in Congress, both Dem and Rep Presidents have held office and not a damn thing has ever really been accomplished on this issue save free stuff for illegal aliens. From Kennedy's misguided attempts in the 60's to Reagan's poor judgement in the 80's to today's combined effort of one Presidential hopeful and one too long sitting Senator, the issue has become one of voter recrutement and not national sovergnty.
If there was ever going to be a march on Washington and the Capital cities of this nation is should be now. But unfortunately the people do not feel nearly as compelled as they should on this issue being called racist for their beliefs. The idea that 400,000 immigrants legally allowed in vs. the millions who have come here illegally is not the issue at hand, security of our border should be the primary issue followed by whatever else they want to talk about. McCain is a lost soul on this one not understanding the common sence approach of shutting the barn door prior to rounding up the horses that got out.
For my side I heard a prominent Republican speaking yesterday saying that not dealing realistically with the 12 million illegals that are here is is misguided. I would say that most Conservatives in real America, average Americans going to work, dropping their kids off in poorly run houses of ill-education ( as in ill-repute) while dealing with the guy at the MVD who barely speaks English but makes more for his "special skill" speaking spanish for the newly arrived who can get a license with or without proof of citizenship, are quite sick of it. Just as we are sick of the long line of known illegals heading up the welcoming committee at every Home Depot in this town that are not being arrested and deported immediately for having broken the law. Only one agency in this state takes it at all seriously and their head man is again getting sued for enforcing the law, Sheriff Joe, when the feds should be dealing with the problem.
When the people get the chance to vote I hope Mccain remembers his break with the common man on this issue. This may be the only reason he and the Democrats don't get the highest office int he land, but it might well become the reason they do if just one of them comes out on this issue promoting something the people can feel secure about.
Being tough on immigration does not make one a racist, it makes one a patriot, regardless of whatever else they might believe, this issue will win or lose the race.
Report Abuse