Yes, It Is Amnesty

Language is very important in politics. The earliest stage of a political fight is often the fight to gain control of the terms used in the debate. Supporters of the bland sounding “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” really don’t like it when opponents call their various schemes “amnesty”. Why? No one wants to be seen as rewarding criminal behavior even when that’s EXACTLY what they are doing. So supporters of amnesty will go to great lengths and intellectual contortions to make sure no one dares use that term.

Take a look at how Marco Rubio, one of the key figures in the most recent amnesty push, phrases the argument.

We have de facto amnesty right now

No we don’t.

If we did, why are we going through this whole process in the first place? If we had de facto amnesty, we wouldn’t hear about how hard it is for illegal immigrants to live in the shadows. If we had de facto amnesty, we wouldn’t be deporting anyone. If we had de facto amnesty, there wouldn’t be a thriving black market for illicit work documents and identity theft.

Amnesty supporters will tell you it can’t be amnesty because illegal immigrants will say there are "tough but fair" penalties for illegal immigrants such as paying a fine of some sort, have to pay back taxes and “go to the back of the line” behind those waiting to come here legally for permanent residency and citizenship.

The last bit is particularly deceitful. The “back of the line” language is designed to make it sound like a real penalty is being imposed on illegals. The reality according to amnesty supporter Chuck Schumer is they would get big rewards up front with no penalties of any sort.

"On day one of our bill, the people without status who are not criminals or security risks will be able to live and work here legally."

According to Rubio, the "penalties" will come years down the road when illegal aliens apply for green cards.

As for the path to citizenship, as Rubio explained when he rolled out his ideas a couple of weeks ago, the senators envision a temporary legal status and then the opportunity to obtain a green card, upon payment of back taxes, learn English, and a background check “among other requirements.” (Although there was no mention of Rubio’s suggestions for fines or community services is made.) The path to citizenship provisions also emphasize that none of the illegal immigrants could jump ahead of those who have legally been pursuing a green card.

In short...illegals will gain immediate legal status upon enactment of the law with no penalty until some unidentified time far off in the future. How is that not amnesty? Until we see the actual legislation, we don't even know if illegals will have to apply for a green card or citizenship. It's very possible whatever category of visa they get upon passage of the scheme will entitle them to stay for as long as they want.

Who is really punished by this system? People waiting to come here legally. The legal immigration system is already a mess but now we’ll be dumping upwards of 11 million new people into the system. They will all have to be processed and have background checks done to claim their new status.

How is an overworked system going to handle that new workload without A- skimping on real checks and B- adding more delays to people who are playing by the rules (pdf)?

One of the supposed penalties illegals will have to pay is to prove they have been paying taxes all along or pay taxes owed.

How will that work?

The IRS is already strained by implementing new ObamaCare regulations but now they will have to process millions and millions of new returns? Will current tax payers see delays in returns or other services? Or will the checks on this condition be cursory and incomplete at best?

And if illegal immigrants have been working and paying taxes by definition they are using fraudulently obtained documents, often committing Identity Theft.

Illegal immigrants are not “undocumented.” They have fraudulent documents such as counterfeit Social Security cards, forged drivers licenses, fake “green cards,” and phony birth certificates. Experts suggest that approximately 75 percent of working-age illegal aliens use fraudulent Social Security cards to obtain employment.

...

Illegal immigration and high levels of identity theft go hand-in-hand. States with the most illegal immigration also have high levels of job-related identity theft. In Arizona, 33 percent or all identity theft is job-related (as opposed to identity theft motivated simply by profit). In Texas it is 27 percent; in New Mexico, 23 percent; in Colorado, 22 percent; California, 20 percent; and in Nevada, 16 percent. Eight of the 10 states with the highest percentage of illegal aliens in their total population are among the top 10 states in identity theft (Arizona, California, Florida, Texas, Nevada, New York, Georgia, and Colorado).

Will they be prosecuted for crimes that a citizen would? Of course not. But don’t call it amnesty!

Like Obi-Wan Kenobi in the original Star Wars movie, amnesty supporters will waive their hand and say, “this isn’t amnesty” and hope the weak minded who oppose amnesty will just let them move along with their plans.

The first battle over amnesty is for the word “amnesty”. If those of us who oppose this policy lose this battle, we will undoubtedly lose the war.

Posted by: DrewM. at 10:30 AM



Comments

1 No-it is reconquista.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 10:32 AM (wbmaj)

2 I don't mind amnesty as long as these folks NEVER FUCKING EVER get citizenship.

Posted by: Al at January 29, 2013 10:32 AM (V70Uh)

3 So the 'penalties' are going to come around the same time we see 'budget cuts.'


Nice to know.

Posted by: RWC at January 29, 2013 10:33 AM (fWAjv)

4 The GOP is a snake eating its own tail.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 29, 2013 10:34 AM (tmzN0)

5 That is what is different and worse than the last immigration reform attempt. At least the original one before the Z Visas.

Posted by: polynikes at January 29, 2013 10:34 AM (m2CN7)

6 2 I don't mind amnesty as long as these folks NEVER FUCKING EVER get citizenship.

Posted by: Al at January 29, 2013 10:32 AM (V70Uh)


Why? To keep them from voting?

Posted by: RWC at January 29, 2013 10:34 AM (fWAjv)

7 This amnest applies to Canadians too, right? So I can go down, claim I'm from Canada and get a green card in a fictitious name?

I don't think I can fake an Australian accent.

Posted by: Invictus at January 29, 2013 10:35 AM (OQpzc)

8 Best part of all of this is...

They won't stop. This will end nothing. The protests and the complaining and the marches and the vilification of the h8ers on the right will all continue.

There are too many people making too much money and getting too much airtime due to this issue for them to ever allow it to be over.

See: Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson

Posted by: wiserbud at January 29, 2013 10:35 AM (LmP4O)

9 Unchecked flood of poverty stricken illegals as well as violent gang members along a 1000 mile border is not immigration--it is invasion, with the resulting loss of national identity. These people are not interested in assimiliating-they speak their own languages and live in their own conclaves. They hate the white "repression" they have been taught and feel entitled to conquer by invading, takingand breeding. We died by our own hand.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 10:36 AM (wbmaj)

10 It's worse than amnesty. Malaysia had an illegal immigration amnesty, which meant, you turn yourself in, we deport your and forgo the jail and caning. THAT's amnesty. Think about overdue library book amnesties. You return the book, they waive the fine. You don't get to keep the book. In this case, the violators not only get to keep the book, they get to order more copies for their families--and, oh yes, they'll be eligible for all sorts of affirmative action bennies denied to us palefaces.

Posted by: Schaeffer at January 29, 2013 10:36 AM (ZN0re)

11 They have fraudulent documents such as counterfeit Social Security
cards, forged drivers licenses, fake “green cards,” and phony birth
certificates.


A lot of them have real drivers licenses. What could go wrong?
http://cis.org/drivers-lisense-security-terrorists-back-door

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at January 29, 2013 10:36 AM (ZKzrr)

12 The “framework” says that “illegals” presently in the US could get a
visa, which wouldn’t allow them access to welfare services, until some
lamebrain federal judge (most likely in the Ninth Circuit) says
otherwise.

Posted by: ObamaDoesn'tCare at January 29, 2013 10:37 AM (e8kgV)

13 Are these these the same laws that already on the books? funny I guess we didn't so such a good job enforcing those either.

Heh..

Posted by: dananjcon at January 29, 2013 10:38 AM (jvd3N)

14 Undocumented Americans!

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 29, 2013 10:38 AM (tmzN0)

15 Why? To keep them from voting?

They already vote.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at January 29, 2013 10:38 AM (ZKzrr)

16 Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a malignant traitor.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 10:38 AM (8y9MW)

17 We would be in a much better position to achieve immigration reform if the Obama Administration had spent that last four years enforcing federal law rather than dismantling it. Brave immigration agents have been left with no recourse but to sue their own Department head, simply so that they—like any other law officers—will be allowed to do their jobs. Just last Friday a federal judge made an important preliminary ruling in their favor. The ICE union also held their own agency head, John Morton, in no confidence with a unanimous vote. The first task for every media agency in the country ought to be to study this lawsuit, to listen to the long-documented complaints of ICE agents, and to review the record of stymied attempts at congressional oversight of DHS. -- U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL)

McCain: DHS Secretary to have final word on border security


OMG

Posted by: ObamaDoesn'tCare at January 29, 2013 10:38 AM (e8kgV)

18 claim I'm from Canada

You'll have to interject "hoser" at odd moments in your conversations, and end all questions with "eh?"

Posted by: Fox2! at January 29, 2013 10:38 AM (1Qpmy)

19 What we have now is a "defacto" one-party supermajority.

Posted by: krakatoa at January 29, 2013 10:39 AM (q46t1)

20 As if the problems of immigration weren’t difficult enough, our Dear
Leader has put his mark on the debate by demanding that “same-sex
couples” be included in his “Final Solution.”

Posted by: Pres**ent Barack “Unexpectedly” Obama at January 29, 2013 10:39 AM (e8kgV)

21 Amnesty doth never prosper: what's the reason? Why if it prosper, none dare call it amnesty!

Posted by: andycanuck at January 29, 2013 10:39 AM (ORGYc)

22 Try to enter Guatemala or Mexico illegally? Get your ass shot. Here? "And what welfare benefits would you and your family of 8 like?"

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 10:39 AM (wbmaj)

23 We should mail absentee ballots out to the entire world.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 29, 2013 10:39 AM (tmzN0)

24 (CNSNews.com) – The Department of Homeland Security is promoting welfare benefits for immigrants on its website WelcometoUSA.gov despite a law that seeks to prevent new immigrants from becoming dependent after entering the United States.

In spite of the law. Feds don't give a shit what the law says. Unless it is you breaking it.

Posted by: Invictus at January 29, 2013 10:40 AM (OQpzc)

25 #18 Bring the doughnuts.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 10:40 AM (wbmaj)

26 Like the Germans did with the Turks: they will be made into guest workers. Don't know how well that has worked out for the Germans but I'll bet there are a whole lot of Turks there who legally shouldn't be.

Posted by: joncelli at January 29, 2013 10:40 AM (RD7QR)

27 2
I don't mind amnesty as long as these folks NEVER FUCKING EVER get citizenship.


Posted by: Al at January 29, 2013 10:32 AM (V70Uh)

After amnesty, a constant drumbeat for citizenship will begin.

Posted by: slatz at January 29, 2013 10:40 AM (mE0Rl)

28 Honest question:

What happened to LiB?

If you want to LiB, amnesty it is!

Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at January 29, 2013 10:40 AM (xAtAj)

29 i don't want to see families separated, so illegal family member you can leave and take your legal members with you if they so wish to go. young children that are legal can be left with a guardian or go home with you and return when they reach 18 but there are consequences to being here illegally....or there used to be....or whatever

Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at January 29, 2013 10:40 AM (GVxQo)

30 Until we see the actual legislation, we don't even know if illegals will have to apply for a green card or citizenship.


How optimistic, Drew.

Posted by: Mr. Fantastic at January 29, 2013 10:40 AM (2IgCi)

31 So if someone has used a false Social Security number or fake birth certificate, will that person still be considered to have not committed a crime if that person was not charged with identity theft? Because yeah, those charges aren't being brought now, I can't see massive amounts of new cases being brought in the future.


Oh and I'll throw the first bomb - I will accept the sincerity of those who support this when they pony up the cash to pay back those who have spent thousands and thousands of dollars going through the legal immigration process. Let's not mention that those who have done so have spent years of their lives jumping through the utterly idiotic hoops through which they must jump and there's no way to give that time back.


If I had gone through the completely and totally insane legal immigration system we have now and then read about this happening there is no way my rage could be contained.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Team Stompy. at January 29, 2013 10:40 AM (VtjlW)

32 Does ObamaTax apply only to citizens? Or would these pardoned criminals have it applied to them as well?

Posted by: BCochran1981 at January 29, 2013 10:40 AM (da5Wo)

33 Don't you guys realize this is all Todd Akin's fault.

Posted by: Captain Hate at January 29, 2013 10:41 AM (lWUBb)

34 Are these these the same laws that already on the books? funny I guess we didn't so such a good job enforcing those either.

Make them a self-impeachable offense.

Posted by: Pres**ent Barack “Unexpectedly” Obama at January 29, 2013 10:41 AM (e8kgV)

35 Yes, the write-up I saw a couple of days ago said it was the same McShitty bill they offered up about 10 years. That was amnesty then and it is still amnesty now.

Posted by: Vic at January 29, 2013 10:41 AM (53z96)

36 It's over.

It really is.

We have told them in the clearest way possible on at least 2 occasions when they tried to ram this down our throats that we do not want this and yet they persist.

It really is time to start getting uncivil!


Posted by: General Woundwort at January 29, 2013 10:41 AM (RrD4h)

37 There is a mindset in a certain type of Republican, victor of hard-won political battles to reach his position, that says you owe him allegiance, not he owes you.

Well, we don't.

Posted by: J. at January 29, 2013 10:41 AM (D5Jpp)

38 They already vote.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at January 29, 2013 10:38 AM (ZKzrr)

I know. That's why I was asking. What do they get with becoming a citizen that they don't get now?

Posted by: RWC at January 29, 2013 10:41 AM (fWAjv)

39 I don't think I can fake an Australian accent. Posted by: Invictus at January 29, 2013 10:35 AM (OQpzc)

It's much easier to fake after a fifth of this. http://tinyurl.com/pu7b7

Posted by: Sean Bannion at January 29, 2013 10:41 AM (sbV1u)

40
Yes it is Amnesty.
And I'm beyond sick of this "living in the shadows" bullshit.
These people don't live in any shadows. They get drivers licenses, go to public schools, and commit a bunch of crimes.

Posted by: Jay at January 29, 2013 10:41 AM (3LaGb)

41 Juan McSame doing this isn't a surprise. I'm a bit more shocked that Jeff Flake is such a fucking snake in the grass.

Wasn't he a Tea Party favorite at one point?

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at January 29, 2013 10:41 AM (e0xKF)

42 I guess this means a repeat of Eisenhower's "Operation Wetback" in the 50s is out of the question.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 10:41 AM (wbmaj)

43 Call it a fucking banana!

Posted by: Jaun McCain at January 29, 2013 10:42 AM (imtbm)

44 Well Drew when the lawyers whisper rabbit screams....

Juan Queeg Spilled the beans on CBS at most the "judgement on enforcement" falls on DHS' head....

so uh "yeah" amnesty mi amigo since Uncle Jan Neo already declared el border 'fine'....

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 10:42 AM (LRFds)

45 And sure, Drew, steal ideas from Hot Air!
;^)

http://tinyurl.com/abmfwb6

Posted by: andycanuck at January 29, 2013 10:42 AM (ORGYc)

46 Don't let 'em hijack other parts of the language, either. They are illegal aliens, not "undocumented persons" or, wait for it, "pre-citizens".

It's amnesty. Period. And, no, a blessing from our new, Magic Hispanic-American doesn't make it not one. (And I'm starting to regret my contributions to get this Tea Party candidate into office.)

It's an amnesty of millions of law-breaking illegal aliens. Period.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at January 29, 2013 10:42 AM (eHIJJ)

47 My wife, who came here legally and went through the troubleof getting a green card really feels dumb now.

Posted by: Heralder at January 29, 2013 10:42 AM (+xmn4)

48 #40 They also routinely cut in front of me at Sam's Club-where they are buying for the family of 8, 10, 12, .....

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 10:43 AM (wbmaj)

49 Also fuck all y'all now I really want Timbits.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Team Stompy. at January 29, 2013 10:43 AM (VtjlW)

50 >> We have de facto amnesty right now

We have all the negative aspects of amnesty right now, but none of the positive (residents living within the law, paying taxes, etc). So actually this statement is not that far from the truth as you make it seem.

I know people don't want to hear it, but Rubio is right. We aren't going to kick out 11 million people. That isn't a battle we are going to win, ever. We lost this battle when the people came into the country. It isn't about whether we lose now or not. We already lost. We need to clean up the current situation and move from here. Let's not let pride get in the way.

Now if you are disagreeing with Rubio's tactics here, then that is a different matter. But he is right that eventually these 11 million people need to become legal citizens.

Posted by: dan-O at January 29, 2013 10:43 AM (kuRCh)

51 Makes me wonder why I ever bothered to go through immigration and naturalization LEGALLY. All that time and money wasted.

Posted by: EC at January 29, 2013 10:43 AM (GQ8sn)

52
It's very possible whatever category of visa they get upon passage of the scheme will entitle them to stay for as long as they want.


They already stay as long as they like. They get free health care at the emergency room as well

Posted by: Velvet Ambition at January 29, 2013 10:44 AM (R8hU8)

53 We should mail absentee ballots out to the entire world.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 29, 2013 10:39 AM



We can't even manage to send them to those serving in the military.

Posted by: huerfano at January 29, 2013 10:44 AM (bAGA/)

54 You know who's really going to get hurt by this amnesty?

Blacks.

In Compton, CA, blacks are being run out of the area by the hispanic gangs. Unless they're hispanic black, hispanics don't like blacks and vise verse.

They're both struggling for the same demographic of jobs and hispanics are generally harder working (consciencious but don't like to take responsibility when working for someone else) with less visible attitude.

Obambi an equal opportunity aggravater; he's out to piss off everyone.

Posted by: Bitter Clinger (aka 3 tooth) at January 29, 2013 10:44 AM (3E2th)

55 What difference does all this make at this point?


Posted by: dananjcon at January 29, 2013 10:44 AM (jvd3N)

56 The backbone of the entitlement system,
illegal immigrants are. Yes, hmmm.

Posted by: S M O D A at January 29, 2013 10:44 AM (trA4n)

57 As someone dating a foreign national (a Brazilian, to be specific), this annoys the hell out of me. My girlfriend is going the legal route to get a work visa and eventually a green card, and illegals will get to work here legally before she will.

I'm only half joking when I tell her just to skip renewing the tourist visa, go to Mexico and cross the Rio Grande.

Posted by: rabidsquirrel at January 29, 2013 10:45 AM (YQ4mh)

58 What do they get with becoming a citizen that they don't get now?

Fined for not having health insurance?

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at January 29, 2013 10:45 AM (ZKzrr)

59 My wife, who came here legally and went through the troubleof getting a green card really feels dumb now.

Posted by: Heralder at January 29, 2013 10:42 AM (+xmn4)


Every fucking person who played by the rules to try and get ahead is getting a major boning by the JEF and his band of cocksuckers.

Posted by: Captain Hate at January 29, 2013 10:45 AM (lWUBb)

60 I don't mind amnesty as long as these folks NEVER FUCKING EVER get citizenship.

You should.

1) They're not terribly interested in citizenship in the first place
a) If they really want, they can vote anyway
b) Besides voting, they get all of the benefits of citizenship.
2) They don't have to be citizens to sway the culture.
3) "Never F-ing Ever" isn't going to happen. The current congress cannot put limits on what a future Congress might do. If they say, "We're creating new immigration status 'X' that means you came over illegally, but got squared with us- and now you can never ever get citizenship" then 2, 4, 6 , or however many years later, another congress can say, "All people of immigration status 'X' are automatically citizens."

Amnesty is wrong, for lots of reasons. If someone really wants to deal with immigration, enforcement must be step one. That is a simple fact of life- until the border is more-or-less controlled (we'll never control it completely, but we can do a whole lot better than we are now), granting any kind of amnesty amounts to inviting illegal immigration and favoring illegals over legal immigrants.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 10:46 AM (8y9MW)

61 I know people don't want to hear it, but Rubio is right. We aren't going to kick out 11 million people. That isn't a battle we are going to win, ever. We lost this battle when the people came into the country. It isn't about whether we lose now or not. We already lost. We need to clean up the current situation and move from here. Let's not let pride get in the way.

Why will this work any better than 1986? Because Obama is more committed than Reagan to securing the border?

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 29, 2013 10:46 AM (tmzN0)

62 WOW
Ace is thought leader. Thats better than community organizer.

Posted by: gigg at January 29, 2013 10:46 AM (41VCE)

63 36. I fully agree. I have long known I'm an "early adopter", and I have no idea how fully the sentiment will eventually spread (hopeful sign--never saw the Tea Party coming), but I never felt I would be a lone eagle.

They simply will not stop. What are we going to do?

Posted by: J. at January 29, 2013 10:46 AM (D5Jpp)

64 Mmm. Tim's.

Posted by: andycanuck at January 29, 2013 10:46 AM (ORGYc)

65 I mean legal residents, not citizens, btw

Posted by: dan-O at January 29, 2013 10:46 AM (kuRCh)

66 More White priviledge on the way..

Posted by: Clemenza at January 29, 2013 10:46 AM (x59Gv)

67 The burden of amnesty should be shared by relocating all of these new "citizens" into neighborhoods that can afford them. Take the top 20 richest communities and spread the love equally among them.

Posted by: Fritz at January 29, 2013 10:46 AM (WM+rJ)

68 Rubio looks Asian to me.

Posted by: Sharron Angle, Ph.D. at January 29, 2013 10:46 AM (r2PLg)

69 You know who's really going to get hurt by this amnesty?

Blacks.


They've been voting for Democrats for 2-3 generations. Reap, sow, meh.


Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at January 29, 2013 10:47 AM (ZKzrr)

70 Our fucking leaders are meeting behind closed doors conspiring with Democrats to pass this shit when they don't even have a fucking budget. They were doing this before the election too.

So Marco fucking Rubio was meeting with schumer and his boys before Romney lost about how to ass fuck the republican electorate permanently. If this passes right wing voters and people that believe in the rule of law will be disenfranchised forever.

Posted by: Mr Pink at January 29, 2013 10:47 AM (Rh+Np)

71 Fk Rubio and anyone else who agrees with him.

Posted by: Vic at January 29, 2013 10:47 AM (53z96)

72 Yeah, when does this Conversation thingie crank up?

Posted by: joncelli at January 29, 2013 10:47 AM (RD7QR)

73 Dejar que se queme.

Posted by: zsasz at January 29, 2013 10:48 AM (wWb/B)

74 49 Also fuck all y'all now I really want Timbits.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Team Stompy. at January 29, 2013 10:43 AM (VtjlW)

neener neener neener

http://tinyurl.com/cbg745f

The baby born in the bathroom of a Tim Hortons in Windsor, Ont., will receive Timbits for life.

"If little Azauria ever had a craving for a Timbit, she can have all the Timbits she wants,” company spokesperson David Morelli told CBC News.



Fo' LIFE!

Posted by: Future Diabetic Azauria at January 29, 2013 10:48 AM (fWAjv)

75 39
I don't think I can fake an Australian accent.

Posted by: Invictus at January 29, 2013 10:35 AM (OQpzc)

----------------------------

It's much easier to fake after a fifth of this. http://tinyurl.com/pu7b7

Posted by: Sean Bannion at January 29, 2013 10:41 AM (sbV1u)


If you wanna go Aussie, go Aussie. I bet you'll talk funny afterward.



http://tinyurl.com/acg7lsd

Posted by: BCochran1981 at January 29, 2013 10:48 AM (da5Wo)

76 Say hello to a permanent Democrat majority.

Thanks, GOP Quislings.

Posted by: Joe Mama at January 29, 2013 10:48 AM (KUTQ7)

77 bevel and huerfano

they can't get them to the military but you can be damn sure they'd get them to every leftard on the planet.....

Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at January 29, 2013 10:49 AM (GVxQo)

78 I find the immigration debate vexing. For one, I honestly do not know what the best answer/solution is. For many problems, I know the solution, but alos understand that politics likely prevent the solution from occuring. For immigration, I am really not sure I know the solution.

For me, I don't like the idea of building a fence, I don't like E-verify. I find those "solutions" to be non-conservative or anti-libertarian. Therefore I don't want to entertain them. Deportation is simply impractical at this point. I also do not find aspects of the Dream Act that bad. I could easily support a law that allowed citizenship to someone who served in the military or earned a degree in some real skill (math, medicine, nursing, technology, even the law).

It seems to me that the solutions to this problem are worse than the problem itself. This is often the case, we make problems worse by trying to solve them. Our immigration system does need revamping, but that to me is seperate and apart from trying to deal with the 10 million illegals. Or at least it could be done seperate and apart.

Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 10:49 AM (gmeXX)

79 50 dan-o,

we are not going to kick out "11 million" more like 44 million people because the American people are caught in a stupid fucking doublebind that could be ended tomorrow.

Cut their benefits and offer 5,000 dollar a head of illegal caught bounties since Mary Landrieu is CONVINCED we are not in a spending problem, and Nancy Pelosi thinks direct wealth transfer is the key to a BOOMING economy.

Baby has a legal birth certificate the baby stays if the parents want or can come "home" when able.

My wife was born at NATO HQ in Belgium ODDLY nobody offered her Belgian fucking citizenship.

America is expected to not only play by "legal rules" no other 1st world nation is expected to endure, but then as an added bonus we have "illegal rules" designed to aid one party that we are expected to endure.

When do I get to invade Mexico and send loot back home to America?

This is a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head of the republic.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 10:49 AM (LRFds)

80 46 Don't let 'em hijack other parts of the language, either. They are illegal aliens, not "undocumented persons" or, wait for it, "pre-citizens".


Pre-citizens. That's a relief! We can legally abort them!

Posted by: Truman North, in the heroes of government health care at January 29, 2013 10:49 AM (2IgCi)

81 The GOP and the Democrats are a tag team.

The Reagan/Gingrich Disturbance has been neutralized.

Back to your huts, serfs!

Posted by: eman at January 29, 2013 10:49 AM (jp2Ur)

82 I should tell my father whose trying to immigrate here to just come over and sit tight. He'll get to do everything I can, including voting and collecting benefits.

This is all kinds of wrong.

Posted by: EC at January 29, 2013 10:49 AM (GQ8sn)

83 73 Dejar que se queme.

Posted by: zsasz at January 29, 2013 10:48 AM (wWb/B)

Si, si. Me gusta.

Posted by: RWC at January 29, 2013 10:49 AM (fWAjv)

84 To the Republic the term de facto makes rubio comfortable in his speechifying... Herh herh herh...

Trap, de facto is. Yeesssssss.


Posted by: S M O D A at January 29, 2013 10:49 AM (trA4n)

85 You cannot "assimilate" people who have no interest in "assimilation." This has been a decades long invasion across a border 1000 miles long. They come here to take-not to give. And, many many come to re-take what they believe is rightfully theirs. This 11 million will be followed by the next 11 million--and that's a fact. The change in demographics will dictate this result. Whites, who will be amonority by 2040 will have no control of this debate or this issue. This is the end-de facto or otherwise. Demographics dictate the future.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 10:50 AM (wbmaj)

86
The baby born in the bathroom of a Tim Hortons in Windsor, Ont., will receive Timbits for life.



By the age of 18, she'll look like Sally Struthers.

Posted by: EC at January 29, 2013 10:50 AM (GQ8sn)

87 If Juan Amnesty McVain (the Other Soros Candidate) or The Bishop were president this would already be a done deal.

Posted by: JDavid at January 29, 2013 10:50 AM (O7eOR)

88
US citizenship means nothing now. It is an empty phrase, reflecting something that once existed in the past.
We are witnessing the dismantling of our country.
Obama wants it that way.
We are the generation that watched as it happened. Our children and grandchildren may villify our names.

Posted by: Who Knows at January 29, 2013 10:50 AM (W+Itt)

89 Ok, but the Left promises to stop calling us bad words, right?

That's the deal. We give them 11 million new voters and a permanent majority. And they promise to stop calling us KKK-loving, racist scum.

We turn America into a one-party left-wing state and they promise to stop calling us nazi bigots.

No more Stormfront insults. No more white sheet jokes. They promised!

Stop calling us bad words!!!

And we know the Left will honor their promise! They promised! They pinky swore!

Yay, we can got to cocktail parties again without fear of KKK jokes! Free at last! Free at last! Thank Obama Almighty we are free at last!

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 29, 2013 10:50 AM (ZPrif)

90 Let me also say, that we conservatives should seek solutions that are right for the country, right and just. That should be our primary concern, the secondary concern should be how it affects the Republican vote.

Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 10:51 AM (gmeXX)

91 Pre-citizens. That's a relief! We can legally abort them!

I knew there was a reason I liked you.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at January 29, 2013 10:51 AM (ZKzrr)

92 You know who's really going to get hurt by this amnesty? Blacks.

They've been voting for Democrats for 2-3 generations. Reap, sow, meh.


Ditto. Couldn't care less.

In fact....it's already starting: http://tinyurl.com/a5nayn3

¡Arriba, amigos! ¡Arriba!

Posted by: Sean Bannion at January 29, 2013 10:51 AM (sbV1u)

93 I just can't wait until we grant this and SURPRISE! Hispanics continue to overwhelmingly vote Democrat, this time with 11 million more to their ranks.

Posted by: McAdams at January 29, 2013 10:51 AM (J/+6n)

94 If we somehow "owe" these fucks the gold club membership and the vote can we please make sure the military gets to fucking vote next cycle?

Oh wait fuck them they don't count.

If we "must" give 44 million amnesty why don't we just abolish INS and tear up all legal tracking of personal data by the government......?


Just show the fuck up you're an American.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 10:51 AM (LRFds)

95 We aren't going to kick out 11 million people.
=========
Fuck you and your dishonest hackery.

They didn't get here overnight and we won't remove them overnight--no one but no one is saying that, except you and the assholes like you.

We lock down the border, we enforce the laws already on the books and in 5 or ten years we won't have an illegal immigration problem.

Which is exactly where we would be right now if they had fucking started this ten years ago when they pushed amnesty the last time.

You know, the same old shit we keep running into with the fucking dishonest leftists--we can't do anything now because it would take ten years before we see results.

And ten years later we have the same fucking problem.

Posted by: RoyalOil at January 29, 2013 10:51 AM (imtbm)

96 43 -55 million households have a legal weapon(s) that the gov't is willing to take away, one weapon at a time, but we can't remove 11 million illegals because it's too hard? BULLSHIT

Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at January 29, 2013 10:51 AM (GVxQo)

97 Our best hope: obama himself screws the pooch on this one and pushes for something even worse. Which by all accounts is exactly what it is about to do. Arrogance

Posted by: Nevergiveup at January 29, 2013 10:52 AM (9Bj8R)

98 For those who want to Let It Burn, here's a flame thrower for you.

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at January 29, 2013 10:52 AM (YmPwQ)

99 How's everyone like those Rubio 2016 fanatics now?

Posted by: sans_sheriff at January 29, 2013 10:52 AM (OQHM+)

100 >> Why will this work any better than 1986? Because Obama is more committed than Reagan to securing the border?

That is an issue of tactics. All I am saying is that there are 3 options: (1) make them legal residents, (2) ignore the problem/kick the can down the road (what we basically do now), (3) deport all illegal aliens. Number 2 sucks and is killing us right now, and number 3 is impossible. Number 1 is the only option.

And I agree that this is completely unfair to those who go through the immigration process legally. But what the F does fairness have to do with anything? What are we, lefties? Sometimes doing things the right way doesn't pay off, and being a dick does pay off. Such is life.

Posted by: dan-O at January 29, 2013 10:52 AM (kuRCh)

101 Anything that doesn't start with "go home" and get in line is a slap in the face to the millions of honest immigrants following the law, I don't care if they haven't committed a crime once they are here - the committed one to get here, and commit one every day they stay.

Start with a guest worker program that is privately managed under bond.

Posted by: Jean at January 29, 2013 10:52 AM (AP6/F)

102 When the dog eater was a Senator, he authored the "Citizens Promotion Act, S-795" that would make HLS and the DOJ jump through hoops and spends billions to advertise, fund armies of atty's and guarantee illegals they would get citizenship in less than a year.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:3:./temp/~mdbsdgEGwG::

Posted by: Deli LLama at January 29, 2013 10:52 AM (lGu1O)

103 Edited:
You cannot "assimilate" people who have no interest in "assimilation." This has been a decades long invasion across a border 1000 miles long. They come here to take-not to give. And, many many come to re-take what they believe is rightfully theirs. This 11 million will be followed by the next 11 million--and that's a fact. The change in demographics will dictate this result. Whites, who will be a minority by 2040, will have no control of this debate or this issue. This is the end-de facto or otherwise. Demographics dictate the future.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 10:53 AM (wbmaj)

104 The “framework” says that “illegals” presently in the US could get a

visa, which wouldn’t allow them access to welfare services,


Which would hold up until the first Federal Judge looked at it and said, "14th Amendment, bitches, do you speak it?" Equal protection for all "within the jurisdiction..." granting them any legal status makes them "withing the jurisdiction" of the United States.

I know people don't want to hear it, but Rubio is right. We aren't going
to kick out 11 million people. That isn't a battle we are going to win,
ever.


Fuck you. No one is saying that. Even the ones who talk about it a) have to be asked first, and b) simply say "Yeah, really we could. It would be difficult, and costly, and probably not worth it. But we could."

We don't have to "kick out" anyone. Simple enforcement of the laws on the books will cause many of them to self deport. Of the rest, they'll be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

All we're asking for is that current law be applied. But somehow that's the same as saying we want to round up all the 11 (probably closer to 1 million illegal aliens in some new Trail of Tears.

And don't even get me started on "illegals brought here as children..."

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 10:53 AM (8y9MW)

105 so what issue will the party cave on after we lose the 2014 election? and then 2016?

Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at January 29, 2013 10:53 AM (GVxQo)

106 If you wanna go Aussie, go Aussie. I bet you'll talk funny afterward. http://tinyurl.com/acg7lsd Posted by: BCochran1981 at January 29, 2013 10:48 AM (da5Wo)

Talk funny?!?!?!?

After that I'll walk funny.

And love it....

Posted by: Sean Bannion at January 29, 2013 10:53 AM (sbV1u)

107 In fact....it's already starting: http://tinyurl.com/a5nayn3


Wow, we get to watch a race war happen again.

Posted by: EC at January 29, 2013 10:53 AM (GQ8sn)

108 93 I just can't wait until we grant this and SURPRISE! Hispanics continue to overwhelmingly vote Democrat

I got a strategy for that:

Me. In a sombrero.

Posted by: John Boehner at January 29, 2013 10:53 AM (tmzN0)

109 69
You know who's really going to get hurt by this amnesty?

Blacks.

They've been voting for Democrats for 2-3 generations. Reap, sow, meh.




Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at January 29, 2013 10:47 AM (ZKzrr)
I was surprised by how much Latinos supported Obama. You got to give it to Obama he worked that angle. Having all those Latino celebrities supporting him probably helped a lot.

Posted by: Long Island at January 29, 2013 10:53 AM (hl8SI)

110 Of course it is amnesty, and it will ensure that there is never any enforcement of our immigration laws (not that there is much of that going on anyhow).

I said this yesterday, and it hurts a bit. I've always been opposed to a National ID, but there isn't any other way around the need for one now. Papers, please. Forty years ago you could get along in society without an ID okay, but no longer. Blame it on computers I guess.

The reality is that you can't do quite a few things nowadays without a photo ID of some sort. With more states such as IL now issuing DLs to illegals, the quality of various state issued IDs is deteriorating to trash anyhow.

I don't like it, but there it is.

Posted by: GnuBreed at January 29, 2013 10:53 AM (ccXZP)

111 Why is number 3 impossible? They seem to think they can register then confiscate guns from 100M Americans, why can't we deport 14M illegals. Just streamline the immigration courts like tax court, that should open up the pipeline a bit.

Posted by: Jean at January 29, 2013 10:55 AM (AP6/F)

112 Come to the country illegally and get rewarded. Sit on your ass, never work and shit out kids and get rewarded. Run huge corporations into the ground but put money in the right pockets and you get rewarded. Bust your ass, follow the rules and you get penalized. Great country we have

Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 29, 2013 10:55 AM (RRVBX)

113 Now if you are disagreeing with Rubio's tactics here, then that is a different matter. But he is right that eventually these 11 million people need to become legal citizens.
Posted by: dan-O at January 29, 2013 10:43 AM (kuRCh)

Of that 11 million, at would venture to say a majority are dependent on our welfare system. Why do they need to become citizens? I agree that reform is needed but it has to be fair to other legal green card holders and applicants and it has to be in our interest and not something that will harm our system even more.

Also my positon has evolved towhere I want a strict employment enforcement prior to anypath to citizenship reform. I want a period of self deportation before I give up on reducing the number of illegals in this country. I am no longer of the opinion that we can'treduce the illegal population.



Posted by: polynikes at January 29, 2013 10:55 AM (m2CN7)

114 About the dog eaters S-795, what didn't get passed in Congress, he is doing now with wild abandon and no one in congress with the guts to de-fund his schemes. Wonder how sequestration will affect his "advertising" in Mexico for food stamps and welfare.


Posted by: Deli LLama at January 29, 2013 10:55 AM (lGu1O)

115 The truth is nobody wants the legal immigrants. They're the doctors and professionals-- we've got plenty of those already. What we need is an exploitable class of voters who will work for nothing and vote reliably to fulfill the power lust of our ruling class. If somebody is here legally, they actually expect to get paid and live independently.

We're importing a new underclass to enrich the current power structure, not them.

Posted by: zsasz at January 29, 2013 10:55 AM (wWb/B)

116 96 PhxGrl,

exactly....

well fuck you you 100+ million gunowners with your old fucking ideas on liberty and natural rights....we have new and improved amigos to offset half of you!

asshole politicians.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 10:55 AM (LRFds)

117 I hope the DNC at least sends Rubio a gift card to El Torito or something, after all the hard work he's done to recruit new Democrat voters.

Posted by: George Orwell what knows where thou concealest thy þr0n at January 29, 2013 10:55 AM (Lxw+T)

118
30 years ago I could not conceive of anyone willingly giving up U.S. citizenship. Two years ago my brother gave his up and I understood completely. (Taxes were destroying his ability to take care of his family.) Today? If I had my brother's option I would give up my U.S. citizenship in a heartbeat.

Damn it.

Posted by: jj at January 29, 2013 10:56 AM (gWO5X)

119 I think I need another identity to blend in. How does Fritz Hector Camacho sound?

Posted by: Fritz at January 29, 2013 10:56 AM (WM+rJ)

120 How's everyone like those Rubio 2016 fanatics now?


-----

Why don't we see how this plays out before deciding to tear down Rubio. 2016 is a long way away. I would say Rubio is the de facto front runner, but that really doesn't mean much now. The field should be wide open. I'm not willing to totally abandon Rubio because of these efforts. At least not yet. I'm as open to a Rubio nomination, as a Jindal nomination, a Paul nomination, or many others that may come to fruition. And I am not going to simply toss Rubio overboard until I know how this will play out.

Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 10:56 AM (gmeXX)

121 We already lost the war, Drew.

Posted by: Catmman at January 29, 2013 10:56 AM (C8XlI)

122 100 Dan-o,

"impossible" I don't think you know what the fucking word means....

did you notice that the military is practicing Urban Kung-Fu ninja shit?

Be a damn shame if the Border Patrol actually had to do their fucking job wouldn't it?

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 10:57 AM (LRFds)

123 Isn't New Zealand supposed to be like a cool country for "freaks" like us? Think they would welcome us? We're industrious, hard working and clean up after ourselves. And we're smart...not like they say.


Posted by: dananjcon at January 29, 2013 10:57 AM (jvd3N)

124 Maybe we can put the new Senator from Massachusetts in charge of this new Trail of Tears?

Posted by: Jean at January 29, 2013 10:57 AM (AP6/F)

125 rubio is doubling down

Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at January 29, 2013 10:57 AM (GVxQo)

126 I marvel at all of the people supposedly on our side wringing their hands and carefully examining the idea of how to properly surrender.

Well, maybe if I shoot myself in the foot first I have some sympathy working for me.

But more likely laughter and ridicule.

Most moves made in panic mode result in an even more disastrous outcome.

The only silver lining that I see is that maybe this will finally result in the necessary divorce of Conservative from the RINO party.

Posted by: ontherocks at January 29, 2013 10:57 AM (aZ6ew)

127 OT has anyone heard about the live fire exercises by the USArmy in Miami and Houston?

Like they are practicing fighting the people?

Posted by: thunderb at January 29, 2013 10:57 AM (Dnbau)

128
Beyond the principle of it, there are the personal ramifications. If it hasn't impacted you yet, it will soon.

It's conflicting ways of life and mores. It's 2 to 4 families in a house next door. It's loosepitbulls, a blocked driveway because of the many cars suddenly on the street, it's getting woken up by roosters in the city.

Posted by: Who Knows at January 29, 2013 10:57 AM (W+Itt)

129 Comprehensive universal health care.

Comprehensive immigration reform.

What they want is a comprehensive permanent majority, and to give the Republicans a comprehensive buttfucking along the way.

Posted by: The littl shyning man at January 29, 2013 10:58 AM (PH+2B)

130 Everyone in the Western US knows there is 'de facto' amnesty.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio might arrest a few drunken mexicans in Maricopa county driving around town. He won't arrest the Mexicans maintaining the golf courses.

In Washington State claiming you've witnessed a white man operating a shovel is right up there next to people claiming they've seen big foot.

Go to any Home Depot or Lowes and off to the side of the parking lot are 'Day Workers' looking for work.

Posted by: harrywr2 at January 29, 2013 10:58 AM (fDMbO)

131 We already lost this argument. I heard a little thing on the radio yesterday and they were interviewing some Hispanic kid that was crying and bawling because they were deporting his dad. Game Over! The destroyers of America will do this ten-thousand times eleventy. It does not matter if you marshal proof, logic and reason that illegal immigration is breaking our system, sob stories and crying trump intelligence now.

My thinking is that this cannot be reversed short of supernatural means....which means intervention by God. And right now it seems like America is under judgement, like God has left us to ourselves. I think that is what the message of 911 was to us...that the protection and providence of God over our nation has been set aside. We can get it back, but that will not be easy and will not come from any political movement.

I mean really; immigration alone is a problem that will break us, now add debt, attacks to the Constitution and the rule of law, corrupt politicians, crazy ideological politicians, corrupt banking and finance, any of them alone are enough to finish us.

And remember most of the U.S is in a sustained drought, a few more years and food will also be something that can break us. This is bleak, but maybe it has to become like 1939 with the world on fire for people to start praying for themselves and the future of their kids, indeed the future for all the earth.

Posted by: Jehu at January 29, 2013 10:58 AM (cSD32)

132 I'm so glad I got rid of my US flag on November 4, 2008. I wouldn't want to be a target for the reconquista.

I should have known something was up when the local Mexican joint launched the Corona-rita.

Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at January 29, 2013 10:58 AM (Ec6wH)

133
Say hello to a permanent Democrat majority.
Posted by: Joe Mama





"When deciding whether a group of people is to be faced with permanent exile, speculation as to their politics is disgusting."

A well-known conservative columnist



Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 29, 2013 10:58 AM (kdS6q)

134 Fuck Rubio. Fuck that little bald conquistador-American piece of shit.

And fuck McCain. Fucking traitor.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 29, 2013 10:58 AM (ZPrif)

135 Live in the shadows immigrants do, swipe your stuff makes it a Reparation ... Yes, hmmm.

Posted by: S M O D A at January 29, 2013 10:58 AM (trA4n)

136 someone pass me the damn matches

Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at January 29, 2013 10:58 AM (GVxQo)

137 Comprehensive national suicide.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 10:58 AM (wbmaj)

138
Sorry to comment and run, but wow SH, could you please leave the country? Your ignorance and irresponsibility are literally dangerous to the community.

Don't like laws? Move to eastern Kenya, not much law there. But don't help degrade and impoverish and enslave this country further with your ignorance and irresponsibility.

And take this idiot twink Rubio with you. Never was very impressed by him -seemed 99% gee-whiz dreamy immigrant American dream salesman, 1% political leader - but he's now shown just how vacuous and worthless he really is.

So any guesses on what this shit will do to the GOP's prospects? Half of Bush's low poll numbers in the second term stemmed pretty much from the amnesty outrage. Where does this debacle lead?

Posted by: non-purist at January 29, 2013 10:58 AM (afQnV)

139 We can all move to Nuie and have a ring of huts surrounding the mu.nu servers.

Posted by: zsasz at January 29, 2013 10:58 AM (wWb/B)

140
I'll go along with granting permanent resident status, but not citizenship.

If they would institute the Fair Tax Plan, I would support sending busses to Mexico to bring as many people as possible here.

Posted by: jwest at January 29, 2013 10:59 AM (ZDsRL)

141 And here's another thing: These will never be outstanding citizens, leaders. That's the whole point.

They will be branded the rest of their lives with the scarlet "A."

The Dems know this.

And the criminal for life, free only at the whim of the rulers, is by far the easiest to rule.

They will vote as they are told and will never stray beyond their place; the Dems get votes and lock themselves in their gated community of white luxury.

Posted by: RoyalOil at January 29, 2013 10:59 AM (imtbm)

142 How is building a fence "not conservative"? Seems to be conservative by very definition.


Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 29, 2013 10:59 AM (4c71i)

143 Suck it GOP!

Posted by: Rubio at January 29, 2013 10:59 AM (O7eOR)

144 The one aspect of our immigration policy that I would absolutely change is the idea of dual citizenship. Now I probably don't know all the details, but I don't understand why we allow dual citizenships in this country. Frankly, we already have it. You are a citizen of the United States and the state you live in. Nothing more is needed.

Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 11:00 AM (gmeXX)

145 America--the new Brazil.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 11:00 AM (wbmaj)

146 Apologize for this troll like comment of mine, but anyone who makes it here from Cuba and the right does a fist pump that they made it to the "land of Freedom." They have an easy path to citizenship. Anyone who comes here from Mexico is an illegal alien and is a law breaker. In my opinion, anyone who want to live here and is not a gang member, should have a good chance to stay. Just an opinion.

Posted by: Eaton Cox is kind of a LIBNO at January 29, 2013 11:00 AM (+wxCD)

147 I'll go along with granting permanent resident status, but not citizenship.

No. For the reason I mentioned before. If congress does this, what prevents them from then, in a few years, after the furor dies down, passing another law that then allows them to apply for citizenship, or even just grants it outright? Remember, Democrats believe simply "living and working here for 5 years" gives someone the "Right" to citizenship.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 11:01 AM (8y9MW)

148 Supporters of the bland sounding “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” really don’t like it when opponents call their various schemes “amnesty”.

Whenever politicians call something "comprehensive", bend over, they're getting ready to shove it up your ass


Posted by: kbdabear at January 29, 2013 11:01 AM (wwsoB)

149 If this isn't really a vote play by Dims., then they shouldn't mind a requirement of this path to citizenship be a no contest plea to a federal immigration law felony that pulls them from voter roles.

Posted by: Jean at January 29, 2013 11:01 AM (DZ9ke)

150 Let me get this straight: 20 million illegal persons are going to que up, pay a fine and get a green card so they can pay taxes. Amiright?

Posted by: Cicero Kid at January 29, 2013 11:01 AM (m0v2L)

151 Where's my free shit, gringos?

Posted by: Fritz Hector Camacho at January 29, 2013 11:01 AM (WM+rJ)

152
Seriously, can anyone here believe it?
We, WE, are the generation that watched our country be dismantled before our eyes.

Simply amazing.

Posted by: Who Knows at January 29, 2013 11:01 AM (W+Itt)

153 To anyone who supports this abortion. Fuck this. And fuck you.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 29, 2013 11:02 AM (ZPrif)

154 146 Eaton Cox,

Awesome thought....

so are you in Deabornistan or Toldeostan?


Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:02 AM (LRFds)

155 You guys make me cry. I want a new voter base.

I can buy these guys' votes for pennies. You assholes are always blabbing about liberty and shit.

I'm sick of it.

Posted by: John Boehner at January 29, 2013 11:02 AM (tmzN0)

156 Who Knows: "Obama wants it that way."

The Bush wing of the party is complicit, too. Bush's amnesty gambit essentially cost us Congress. They have been the strongest proponents of amnesty since the first amnesty was imposed even though the Democrats have now taken the lead. The working class (which was much of the blue collar Dems) used to be against amnesty since the increased labor pool impacted them the most acutely. They put pressure on their leaders not to go full retard for more amnesty and especially not without GOP cover.

Well, now the GOP is providing cover. Again. The Stupid Party has just received another bolus of Bushism and Rubio is the prime carrier. MCain and Graham are just being the a**holes they always were.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at January 29, 2013 11:02 AM (eHIJJ)

157 "Half of Bush's low poll numbers in the second term stemmed pretty much from the amnesty outrage."


I looked the other way for some of Bush's bullshit, but it was his amnesty crap that prompted my abstention from voting in 2004. The only difference is that now, I'm voting D.


If we're going to end up on the left, don't half-ass it.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 29, 2013 11:02 AM (4c71i)

158 The one aspect of our immigration policy that I would absolutely change
is the idea of dual citizenship. Now I probably don't know all the
details, but I don't understand why we allow dual citizenships in this
country.



There is no dual citizenship. In the US govt's eyes, you are either a US citizen or not.

For example, I immigrated here from Canada and became naturalized. I am a citizen in both Canada and the US. Canada recognizes dual citizens, but the US does not. I cannot enter the US using my Canadian passport, only my US one.

Posted by: EC at January 29, 2013 11:02 AM (GQ8sn)

159
The reason I say that we won't be able to simply deport 11 million people is because we have been trying this for 30+ years and it has been a constant and abject failure. Also, when you try to uproot people who have been here for 10-20-30 years (illegally), there are serious political consequences. Even though they don't vote (and of course many of them do, and are encouraged to do so). This is not a battle that can be won.

Yes this is incredibly unfair. And people are pissed off about it. But we need to get over it and focus on what the real goal should be: stopping illegal immigration. Build the Great Wall of China on the border. Boost border patrol. Deal with the Mexican government that sends the dregs of their society up here on purpose. This is where our focus should be.

Posted by: dan-O at January 29, 2013 11:03 AM (kuRCh)

160 Every person on this site hates peoples of color............... Why?

Posted by: Mary Clogginstein from Brattleboro, Vt and Proud of it !!!!!!!!!! at January 29, 2013 11:03 AM (48wze)

161 Turn on Rubio you must, his scrotum into a ball gag
you must convert...

Posted by: S M O D A at January 29, 2013 11:03 AM (trA4n)

162 Was it Senator Sessions that called the previous comprehensive immigration reform, a "comprehensive piece of shit"?

LOL if he did!

Posted by: EC at January 29, 2013 11:03 AM (GQ8sn)

163 Well at least it will be easier to smuggle weapons and ammo from mexico.
http://marketdailynews.com/2013/01/23/barack-obama-to-shut-down-southern-air-defense-systems/

Posted by: gigg at January 29, 2013 11:03 AM (41VCE)

164 Roman Empire: We'll just let some of these German tribes in. But don't worry, they'll assimilate and be just like Roman citizens. I mean what could possibly go wrong by let millions of people swarm over your border and settle in your country?

Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 29, 2013 11:04 AM (RRVBX)

165 They'll not only get to cut in line for citizenship, they'll get to cut in line for Obamacare

Schmuckie Schumer and other amnesty fetishists have already confirmed that the illegals will be eligible for Obamacare and they hope they use it often

Posted by: kbdabear at January 29, 2013 11:04 AM (wwsoB)

166 I caught a good tail wind. Looks like I'll be arriving in DC sooner than I thought.

Posted by: Fiscal Insolvency at January 29, 2013 11:04 AM (tmzN0)

167 A path to citizenship? A path to displacement. Displacement is not assimilation. Ask those in the southwest. They are losing one town, city at a time. In the end, it is all tribal. And if a tribe is not willing to resist, it is destroyed.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 11:04 AM (wbmaj)

168 Since the middle class chose not to replace itself, somebody has to pay into Social Security to pay for my retirement. It might as well be the illegal aliens.

Posted by: Al at January 29, 2013 11:04 AM (V70Uh)

169 Let me get this straight: 20 million illegal persons are going to que up, pay a fine and get a green card so they can pay taxes. Amiright?

Rubio will be performing all week, folks, and don't forget to tip your waitress!

Posted by: George Orwell what knows where thou concealest thy þr0n at January 29, 2013 11:04 AM (Lxw+T)

170 158 EC,

and being a US "piggybank" means that Chucjk Schumer thinks you owe him for life....


Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:04 AM (LRFds)

171 160 -- I am a minority, suck it asshole, why silence me. Fuck you racist.

Posted by: gigg at January 29, 2013 11:04 AM (41VCE)

172 >Until we see the actual legislation, we don't even know if illegals will
have to apply for a green card or citizenship. <

Or in other words you are getting apoplectic over the framework and initial discussions without knowing what is really in any potential legislation? The rest is conjecture and speculation on what the bill may contain.

I understand the sentiment. We've been doinked up the squeakhole since Reagan on immigration issues. I don't want to go down that road again. But we've kicked this can far enough.

I would rather say that our line should be drawn at reaching a tangible securing of the border as a first step. Period, full stop. Next, nobody should receive any federal benefits until they qualify for a Green Card. On that particular issue, I save my scorn for the Chamber of Commerce. To wit, why don't the people hiring these illegals pay full boat- medical care, unemployment, taxes, etc.? Lose your job? Deported or your employer pays benefits until you find another job. Felony or misdemeanor? Goodbye.

Why should we pay while employers skate when our communities, schools and hospitals pay the freight. That's total BS.

By the way, you want to confer some type of "protected" status that keeps them from getting deported- we can discuss that. Not a "legal" status which allows them to suck off the tit of our government forever.

Posted by: Marcus at January 29, 2013 11:04 AM (GGCsk)

173
#164 QuietMan

You have it perfectly with your analogy. Bingo.

Posted by: Who Knows at January 29, 2013 11:05 AM (W+Itt)

174 #160 Because they all suck Islamic dick, Mary, unlike me an my Guatemalan-Mexican wife and Brazilian-Honduran mistress.

Posted by: Kook in the Mirror at January 29, 2013 11:05 AM (ORGYc)

175 anyone who makes it here from Cuba and the right does a fist pump that
they made it to the "land of Freedom." They have an easy path to
citizenship. Anyone who comes here from Mexico is an illegal alien and
is a law breaker. In my opinion, anyone who want to live here and is not
a gang member, should have a good chance to stay. Just an opinion.


The difference is that Cuba does not allow people to immigrate to the US. We used to do the same for Russians who were able to get over hear and then sneak away from their escorts.

With Cubans its a little more informal (for a few reasons), but essentially we're granting any Cuban who can make it to the Continental US political asylum. The immigration process from Mexico to the US may be hard, but it's not impossible.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 11:05 AM (8y9MW)

176 118
30 years ago I could not conceive of anyone willingly giving up U.S. citizenship. Two years ago my brother gave his up and I understood completely. (Taxes were destroying his ability to take care of his family.) Today? If I had my brother's option I would give up my U.S. citizenship in a heartbeat.

Damn it.
Posted by: jj at January 29, 2013 10:56 AM (gWO5X)

If this passes I will be looking into it too. Let them have it, let it burn. I wouldn't be able to stop it anyway if this shit passes

Posted by: Mr Pink at January 29, 2013 11:05 AM (Rh+Np)

177 You know all those illegals working here and sending money home?

Won't it be more like 50 million once they bring their families here, because compassion?

Posted by: Invictus at January 29, 2013 11:05 AM (OQpzc)

178 Lets get this straight.....we make 11 million illegals "legal" while at the same time create an equal number of new criminals over "gun safety".....our legislatures are turning into ancient Rome....self serving and dealing with whatever barbarians happen to be at the gate...

Posted by: CelticCaptain at January 29, 2013 11:05 AM (7N2jC)

179 There is no dual citizenship. In the US govt's eyes, you are either a US citizen or not.

For example, I immigrated here from Canada and became naturalized. I am a citizen in both Canada and the US. Canada recognizes dual citizens, but the US does not. I cannot enter the US using my Canadian passport, only my US one.
Posted by: EC at January 29, 2013 11:02 AM (GQ8sn)


I was told something entirely different by the immigration attorney. She said US does offer dual citizenships. My wife cannot have a dual citizenship though because her home country of Denmark does not allow them.

Posted by: Heralder at January 29, 2013 11:05 AM (+xmn4)

180 "Posted by: Eaton Cox is kind of a LIBNO at January 29, 2013 11:00 AM (+wxCD)"


So was it the strawman you decided to attack that tipped you to the trollish nature of your post, or was it something else?

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 29, 2013 11:05 AM (4c71i)

181 500 busses carrying 50 people each can dismigrate (new word) 9 million people in one year.

It's physically possible to remove the illegal migrants. The Powers That Be simply do not want to do that. After all, they let them in in the first place.

Now do you see the Republic is a wheezing zombie?

Posted by: eman at January 29, 2013 11:06 AM (jp2Ur)

182 #160 How many people of color surround you and your neighbors in Vermont? My guess is a precious few, and they would be your landscapers.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 11:06 AM (wbmaj)

183 gigg

mary is a sock

Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at January 29, 2013 11:06 AM (GVxQo)

184 164 TQM,

Yup, I once used the colorful language to explain that the Romans spent a hundred years teaching the Germans how to teach then the Greek love they taught the Germans....

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:06 AM (LRFds)

185 Well, as a white guy, now I get to be a minority, right, with all those bennies and shit?




...What? No?

Posted by: zsasz at January 29, 2013 11:06 AM (wWb/B)

186 Isn't New Zealand supposed to be like a cool country for "freaks" like us? Think they would welcome us?

They're socialists and regulate their immigration (there's a concept...) by, get this, BMI.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at January 29, 2013 11:06 AM (ZKzrr)

187 From 1994 - 2000, the Republican party forced Clinton to reduce capital gains taxes, institute welfare reform, and at least pay lip service to the phrase "the era of big government is over". Since 2000, the Republican party got us into two expensive "police actions" (if our Congress doesn't have the guts to say "War? Aye" then don't call it a war) that were never very popular, adopted Democrat pork-barrel policies, and then played Alfred E. Neuman with the percolating Fannie Mae disaster. Now it's just going to let millions of poor, uneducated, illiterate people, who have no understanding of American culture, into this country, and they will get benefits I pay for. Fuck you Republican Party.

Posted by: SFGoth at January 29, 2013 11:06 AM (dZ756)

188 I ask two things of anyone who wants to immigrate. 1) Obey our laws; 2) Speak our language.


Apparently, that makes me a homophobic, immigrant hating, racist Reich-winger. Or something.

Posted by: BCochran1981 at January 29, 2013 11:06 AM (da5Wo)

189 Like I said yesterday and someone else repeated up thread. If you are in the LIB to the ground group without the goal of returning the United States to the right path, this is what you've been looking for.

I've got my application ready to fill out to join that group but I can't quite pull the trigger. I still have a little fight left in me but not much.

Posted by: polynikes at January 29, 2013 11:06 AM (m2CN7)

190 Oh and demand use if the Federal e-verify for any employee.

Also allow deportation of people who don't sign up for any deal by a set deadline or enter the country after that date. No exceptions.

Posted by: Marcus at January 29, 2013 11:07 AM (GGCsk)

191 As someone noted on an earlier thread...Mary Cloggenstein, sock or not, is no longer funny (if it every was).

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at January 29, 2013 11:07 AM (YmPwQ)

192 #185--You get to run for your fucking life.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 11:07 AM (wbmaj)

193 176 Mr Pink,

I'm telling you enough US conservatives go to Canada we can start over.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:07 AM (LRFds)

194 183 I know I am tired of the racist, homophobic, sexist, screed though, it's the oldest trick in the book , and I intend to make it the lamest fucking trick in the book.

Posted by: gigg at January 29, 2013 11:07 AM (41VCE)

195 Sorry to comment and run, but wow SH, could you please leave the country? Your ignorance and irresponsibility are literally dangerous to the community.Don't like laws? Move to eastern Kenya, not much law there. But don't help degrade and impoverish and enslave this country further with your ignorance and irresponsibility.----

Wow - non-purist. I guess you have no room in this country for me. Yeah, I don't like all laws. I think most laws are bad, and I'm not in favor of making further bad laws. And I'm not in favor of enforcing bad laws on the books.

I'm not sure how I'm being irresponsible either. Make an honest debate of what you want and tell me why it is proper and right. I have honestly raised the point that I find E-verify to be a terrible idea.

I think building a fence is a terrible idea. Why? Because it will be costly, it will not work, and frankly I just wince at the idea of living inside a wall. Now the third point is only a minor one, but something I think we as conservatives should really consider. If you told me that a fence would abosultely work, then ok. But I have strong doubts that it would work. Note that thisdoes not mean I am against border enforcement. It means that I think border enforcement is more than building a fence. See Rick Perry's ideas on border enforcement.

Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 11:07 AM (gmeXX)

196 Which city wants all the Malian refugees we're about to get?

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 29, 2013 11:07 AM (ZPrif)

197 168Since the middle class chose not to replace itself, somebody has to pay into Social Security to pay for my retirement. It might as well be the illegal aliens.
Posted by: Al at January 29, 2013 11:04 AM (V70Uh) This is exactly why immigration reform would ideally be tied to changing to the Fair Tax Plan. The more legal permanent residents paying into the system with sales tax the better for the citizens who get the benefits.

Posted by: jwest at January 29, 2013 11:07 AM (ZDsRL)

198 New sock of an old sock, mary clogginstein is.

Posted by: S M O D A at January 29, 2013 11:08 AM (trA4n)

199
It is theRoman Empire redux.

Posted by: Who Knows at January 29, 2013 11:08 AM (W+Itt)

200 My guess is a precious few, and they would be your landscapers.

Haitians escaping Canada.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/15/us/15border.html

I can't make this shit up.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at January 29, 2013 11:08 AM (ZKzrr)

201 Penalty = the comfy chair

Posted by: teh Wind at January 29, 2013 11:08 AM (HBU8E)

202
WASHINGTON (AP) -- U.S. consumer confidence plunged in January to its
lowest level in more than a year, reflecting higher Social Security
taxes that left Americans with less take-home pay.


The Conference Board said Tuesday that its consumer confidence index
dropped to 58.6 in January. That's down from a reading of 66.7 in
December and the lowest since November 2011.





How can this be? I mean in today's day and age isn't, What difference does it make, our motto?

Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 29, 2013 11:09 AM (RRVBX)

203 upon payment of back taxes, learn English, and a background check “

Learn English, LOL .. with every damn public school teaching them in Spanish through the 8th grade?

Background check? Surrrrrrre, that'll happen after they run to the MSM crying that it's RAAACCCISSSSTTT

Back taxes? How do you calculate back taxes on phony ID's and cash under the table?

Posted by: kbdabear at January 29, 2013 11:09 AM (wwsoB)

204 I just saw a bumper sticker: SAVE THE WHITES

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 11:09 AM (wbmaj)

205 The whole "well as long as their not made citizens,fine" line is horse shit.

Is the GOP going to be the Party that says these Hispanics should remain 2nd Class citizens once we can no longer deport them? Of course not, we HAVE to cater to the Hispanic vote, that's what the media tells us! Just this one last time, then we'll get tough!

If you pass a "pathway", every single illegal will be on that pathway, and millions more will flood over and say they've been here for years.

Posted by: McAdams at January 29, 2013 11:09 AM (J/+6n)

206 Which city wants all the Malian refugees we're about to get?

Berkeley, Cambridge, Madison...

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at January 29, 2013 11:09 AM (ZKzrr)

207 164
Roman Empire: We'll just let some of these German tribes in. But
don't worry, they'll assimilate and be just like Roman citizens. I mean
what could possibly go wrong by let millions of people swarm over your
border and settle in your country?


Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 29, 2013 11:04 AM (RRVBX)

Sad but true. The late Romans basically ceded their army to the barbarians, because hey, only losers want to be in the military.

Posted by: joncelli at January 29, 2013 11:09 AM (RD7QR)

208 I thought you were a radical libertarian, Shit Head, not a conservative?

Posted by: andycanuck at January 29, 2013 11:09 AM (ORGYc)

209 The reason I say that we won't be able to simply deport 11 million
people is because we have been trying this for 30+ years and it has been
a constant and abject failure. Also, when you try to uproot people who
have been here for 10-20-30 years (illegally), there are serious
political consequences.


And, once again (I get not reading the post, but at least read the comments)- that's not even a position that is on the table. No one is saying we should be rounding up and deporting them.

As for "we have been trying this for 30+years..." Bullshit. We haven't tried anything like it. Most of the time when an illegal is caught, they're released into their own recognizance to return for a formal immigration hearing. I understand the percentage that actually show up for that hearing is in the low single digits. And then, because they're here illegally (and undocumented) when they get caught again, they can just give a different name (or even just a different spelling) and they're "first time offenders" again.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 11:10 AM (8y9MW)

210 Hhhmmm... If you want less of something, tax it. Since Obama and his loyal democrats want more revenue, they should enact an immigrant tax.

Make it an annual tax on immigrants; say an additional 20% of annual income, until they can 'qualify' for citizenship.

Ya, ya, I know. The dems would never go for it, it wouldn't be fair. The GOP doesn't have the courage. Only the libertarians would support it, and they are too few in number.

But what the hell, SELL US citizenship. IF you can pay the price, you get to be a US Citizen!. How does half a million bucks sound to you? What is the current price for a college degree? We could balance the budget and reduce US Treasury debt, if not eliminate it entirely.

Posted by: Skandia Recluse at January 29, 2013 11:10 AM (47jOx)

211 Arm yourselves. The shit will be hitting the fan soon. Why else would DHS buy BILLIONS of rounds of ammo. They are preparing for war and I don't think it will be against the illegals.

Posted by: TC at January 29, 2013 11:10 AM (vYB+W)

212 Let's just move half of Haiti here. Cause Haitians are so awesome and productive.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 29, 2013 11:10 AM (ZPrif)

213 I caught a good tail wind. Looks like I'll be arriving in DC sooner than I thought.
Posted by: Fiscal Insolvency at January 29, 2013 11:04 AM (tmzN0)
-----------------------------------------------------------
A little late to the party pal. I have been simmering here in DC since '38.

Posted by: Total Financial Devastation at January 29, 2013 11:10 AM (jucos)

214 Moving to bumfuck nowhere and living in a shack sounds better and better every day. Anything to get away from the unfolding insanity.

Question for you amnesty supporters - why can't we just build that fucking fence first? Why is it always amnesty, then build a fence? Because every time we play that song and dance, the fence never happens. Who the fuck cares about the illegal criminals here now - finish the job first. Fence. Now.

Posted by: Gaff at January 29, 2013 11:10 AM (uh3SH)

215 Byron York on FoxB now saying this shit is going nowhere. The Republican leadership in the Senate says it is going nowhere. The gang of 8 with the 4 RINOs can suck ass.



And yes, Rubio is now a RINO

Posted by: Vic at January 29, 2013 11:11 AM (53z96)

216 For those thinking of New Zealand or Australia : beautiful places, but the gun laws and pc are the same, in NZ's case, much worse.

Posted by: Who Knows at January 29, 2013 11:11 AM (W+Itt)

217 I was told something entirely different by the immigration attorney. She said US does offer dual citizenships.

Here's what the State Dept says:

http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1753.html

However, dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the
foreign country. They are required to obey the laws
of both countries. Either country has the right
to enforce its laws, particularly if the person later travels there.Most
U.S.
citizens, including dual nationals, must use a
U.S. passport to enter and leave the United States.
Dual nationals may
also
be required by the foreign country to use its
passport to enter and leave that country. Use of the foreign passport
does not
endanger U.S. citizenship.Most countries permit a
person to renounce or otherwise lose citizenship.

Posted by: EC at January 29, 2013 11:11 AM (GQ8sn)

218
I just can't wait until we grant this and SURPRISE! Hispanics continue to overwhelmingly vote Democrat, this time with 11 million more to their ranks.

Posted by: McAdams





"Those whose primary concern about immigration reform is how many votes it will buy the GOP are horrible human beings."

A well-known conservative columnist

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 29, 2013 11:11 AM (kdS6q)

219 I do have to say I am heartened by what I read here. I knew six years ago that there could and probably would be a divergence between what the Republican party felt it needed, and what was needed for the nation, and liberty (hopefully one and the same).

Let us go with what is needed for the hour, not what the politicians need for their glory.

Posted by: J. at January 29, 2013 11:11 AM (D5Jpp)

220 2 I don't mind amnesty as long as these folks NEVER FUCKING EVER get citizenship.
Posted by: Al at January 29, 2013 10:32 AM (V70Uh)

Or their children.

The problem is that this will create 'second class citizens', and they will soon be agitating for citizenship.

Like murderers and rapists, who you KEEP IN JAIL to ensure they don't hurt anyone else, the only way to ensure they don't agitate for citizenship is that they DO NOT get permanent resident status.

Posted by: blindside at January 29, 2013 11:11 AM (x7g7t)

221 "The first battle over amnesty is for the word “amnesty”. If those of us who oppose this policy lose this battle, we will undoubtedly lose the war."

So far, I haven't heard any national-level GOP politician speak out against this latest amnesty push. Not one. Without legislative resistance, this massive Democratic voter expansion program is a fait accompli and arguments deconstructing the semantic meaning and etymological roots of the word 'amnesty' become academic, moot.

The Republican Establishment has convinced itself that millionsof non-English speaking, mostly uneducated and unskilled Hispanic immigrants, when given the choice between the GOP, with its emphasis on self-reliance, hard work, self-respectand individual freedom, and the Democratic Party, which offers Free Shit For Life (TM), are going to choosethe GOP. The basic premise seems to be that new Hispanic immigrants will gravitate to conservativism since most of them are Catholics. Right. Boston, anyone?

Yes, amnesty will be a disaster, but the failure of GOP leadership and logic is the story here: further proof, if any more is needed, that the Republican Party is unwilling or unable to fulfill its crucial role as the opposition party. Ryan's 'strategy' of prudence and subtlety isn't a strategy. It's an approach, a method, a means. A goodstrategy for an opposition party would be to oppose everything the Democrats propose, on every issue, and let them reach across the aisle for once.

Posted by: troyriser at January 29, 2013 11:11 AM (vtiE6)

222 Straw-Camel-Back

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 11:12 AM (wbmaj)

223 I live in a Dallas suburb, do a lot of church ministry work with illegals, and I have to agree with Rubio: we really do have de facto amnesty right now.

No one is deported unless they break some horrendous law, the police don't check whether someone is illegal, and it's ridiculously easy for illegals to get government benefits.

I'm in favor of immigration reform, but not in the sense that it is too often used. After paying back taxes and undergoing other assorted punishments, illegals should gain some sort of conditional guest worker card, or even a Green Card. Illegal immigration should NEVER result in citizenship.

Also, let's get rid of the anchor baby provision.

Posted by: Michael the Hobbit at January 29, 2013 11:12 AM (hzV1U)

224 218 LDC,

"Conservative columnists" who want to gift the democrats with a Constitution breaking supermajority in perpetuity are fucking retards.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:12 AM (LRFds)

225 And, yes, I just did what the left does: Take a despised group and use it with another group to imply one is like the other.

Ie: Nazis and NRA. Segregationists and the NRA. Terrorists and the NRA (and TEA Party)

Posted by: blindside at January 29, 2013 11:13 AM (x7g7t)

226 212 Let's just move half of Haiti here. Cause Haitians are so awesome and productive.


Well, the GOP does need a pool of talent for future office-holders.

Posted by: George Orwell what knows where thou concealest thy þr0n at January 29, 2013 11:13 AM (Lxw+T)

227 I thought you were a radical libertarian, Shit Head, not a conservative?
---

I'll assume that was directed at me. Being a conservative and being a libetarian are not mutually exclusive, as you and others assume it is.

Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 11:13 AM (gmeXX)

228 I'm telling you enough US conservatives go to Canada we can start over.


Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:07 AM (LRFds)Hmmm....Good beer...CheckCold-ass winters...XXAnnoying up-talk accents...XXNickel Back...XX
Eh...No.







Posted by: dananjcon at January 29, 2013 11:13 AM (jvd3N)

229 So far, I haven't heard any national-level GOP politician speak out against this latest amnesty push. Not one.
----

Jeff Sessions and Mike Lee have.

I'm curious if any of the (relevant) governors have commented on it yet.

Posted by: Y-not at January 29, 2013 11:13 AM (5H6zj)

230 It is theRoman Empire redux.



Posted by: Who Knows at January 29, 2013 11:08 AM (W+Itt)

Actually the Roman Empire broke up into individual City/States. IOW it divided into individual principalities. That is the best thing that could happen to us right now.

Posted by: Vic at January 29, 2013 11:13 AM (53z96)

231

Chinese maternity tourists

http://tinyurl.com/ap5ogtu


Posted by: LC LaWedgie at January 29, 2013 11:13 AM (0It32)

232 What, we do this for you and you still want to eat us?

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 11:13 AM (wbmaj)

233 Back taxes? How do you calculate back taxes on phony ID's and cash under the table?



Posted by: kbdabear at January 29, 2013 11:09 AM

How the hell can you get a permit to do a damned illegal thing!

Posted by: Dr Leonard McCoy at January 29, 2013 11:13 AM (wwsoB)

234 The basic premise seems to be that new Hispanic immigrants will gravitate to conservativism since most of them are Catholics.

Kennedy, Kerry, Pelosi, etc., etc., etc.

Posted by: zsasz at January 29, 2013 11:13 AM (wWb/B)

235 Screw this thing up, O'bama will , he will over reach his hand as liberals do .... Hmmmmmm.

Posted by: S M O D A at January 29, 2013 11:13 AM (trA4n)

236 Remember, Haiti is only poor because of racist white people who were probably Republicans and KKK nazis.

Also. white Americans in 2013 are to blame for the legacy of slavery ... in other countries. That were part of the French Empire. 200 years ago.

It's complicated. Point is -- pay up, you pale-faced, right-wing, KKK motherfuckers!

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 29, 2013 11:13 AM (ZPrif)

237 "Fuck you Republican Party.
Posted by: SFGoth at January 29, 2013 11:06 AM (dZ756)"



How is this substantially different than the standard Libertarian position?


Hell, this seems to be the only situation where there is no party representing sanity.

Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 29, 2013 11:14 AM (4c71i)

238 And if illegal immigrants have been working and paying taxes by definition they are using fraudulently obtained documents,
-------
Not necessarily. If an illegal is illegally employed 9no proof of employment eligibility) they can get a taxpayer ID number (TID) to use on tax returns. No fraudulently obtained documents required. The IRS is very flexible when it comes to collecting taxes. They don't care if you work legally or not until they decide to care.

Posted by: RioBravo at January 29, 2013 11:14 AM (eEfYn)

239
Byron York on FoxB now saying this shit is going nowhere. The Republican leadership in the Senate says it is going nowhere. The gang of 8 with the 4 RINOs can suck ass.

Posted by: Vic




In the Senate, how would the leadership stop it? The filibuster has been "reformed", and 55 Dems + 4 Repubs from the gang of 8 gets you to 59.

Just need one more Repub. Not exactly like trying to fill an inside straight.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 29, 2013 11:14 AM (kdS6q)

240 Btw, whoever has been manning Drudge for the past week or so has been killing it.


Current Headline: Coming: Amnesty for 11 Million


Right about the headline is an upside down American flag.




Above and to the left of that in smaller print: 2007 bill collapsed after after voters flooded Congress with angry calls (hint hint)

Posted by: BCochran1981 at January 29, 2013 11:14 AM (da5Wo)

241 I think building a fence is a terrible idea. Why?
Because it will be costly
-->Hey, shovel-ready project. Create jobs, and probably less expensive than alternatives.

it will not work
-->How do you know? I suspect it will work better than our current plan (open border, crippling RoE, etc.)

and frankly I just wince at the idea of living inside a wall.
-->It won't be around your house.

Posted by: Dante at January 29, 2013 11:14 AM (NWLVJ)

242 215 Byron York on FoxB now saying this shit is going nowhere. The Republican leadership in the Senate says it is going nowhere. The gang of 8 with the 4 RINOs can suck ass.

What about the gelding Speaker? Isn't he drawing up a bill?

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 29, 2013 11:14 AM (tmzN0)

243 Why not add anarchist to your self-description too?

Posted by: andycanuck at January 29, 2013 11:14 AM (ORGYc)

244 228 Danajcon,

The cold is like a forcefield against the lazy and stupid.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:15 AM (LRFds)

245 >> As for "we have been trying this for 30+years..." Bullshit.

We have been trying to push this approach for 30+ years and it has never become a reality. I don't doubt the logistics of moving 9 million people; that is not the issue. The issue is making deportation a political reality.

Posted by: dan-O at January 29, 2013 11:15 AM (kuRCh)

246 If those of us who oppose this policy lose this battle, we will undoubtedly lose the war.

This war has been over for decades and we (those who believe in the rule of law, that illegal means illegal, that illegals ought not cut in line ahead of those who are trying to immigrate legally, etc.) lost, in a rout.

Posted by: DocJ at January 29, 2013 11:15 AM (A5uiv)

247 Hmmm....Good beer...CheckCold-ass winters...


Canadian girls are pretty nice. They keep you warm at night, or at least that's what the Beach Boys told me.

Posted by: EC at January 29, 2013 11:16 AM (GQ8sn)

248 209

Asset forfeiture of businesses or personages caught employing illegals, just as the case with drug laws. It would take care of the issue overnight,mwith no harshness towards our illegal friends.

But the Democrats and many Republicans wish to pay lip serbice to rule of law, not true service. Unless it is you they wish to have obey the law, or a law they actually agree with (gun control).

Posted by: J. at January 29, 2013 11:16 AM (D5Jpp)

249
You folks do whatever you want with the Mexicans.

I'm going to be a Belle Islander.

Posted by: jwest at January 29, 2013 11:16 AM (ZDsRL)

250 #240 A Mexican flag would also have been appropriate.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 11:16 AM (wbmaj)

251 The other thing about the Roman Empire is that when it changed from a republic to an empire and the people were disenfranchised they lost interested in the running of the empire. They no longer joined the military because the government would feed and entertain them. The government had to hire barbarian armies and their loyalties were suspect at best. The government needed higher and higher taxes and to debase the currency to pay for it all. Power and money was in the hands of a few, the average citizens didn't
have many options so they were given bread and circuses to keep them
quiet. But that didn't last long either.


Seems to be a pattern here. Vae victus

Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 29, 2013 11:16 AM (RRVBX)

252 What about the gelding Speaker? Isn't he drawing up a bill?

His favorite crayon is orange.

Posted by: George Orwell what knows where thou concealest thy þr0n at January 29, 2013 11:17 AM (Lxw+T)

253 18 claim I'm from Canada You'll have to interject "hoser" at odd moments in your conversations, and end all questions with "eh?"

---
Also diagram the neutral zone trap and sing all the lyrics to 2112

Posted by: Buzzsaw90 at January 29, 2013 11:17 AM (SO2Q8)

254
If the R leadership thinks that they won't lose Conservative/Constitutionalist voters like myself over this betrayal then they best think again. This amnesty crap is a deal breaker. We got no place else to go? Bullsh*t! I'll start voting Libertarian or Constitution Part or Freedom or whatever; just know that the enablers (R Party) to socialism (D Party) will not get my vote again no matter how many nice election eve plea/essays Ace writes about how a protest vote will only help the progressives.
You expect this kinda crap from the McCains and Boehners but Rubio! Major disappointment.

Posted by: calvinronald reagancoolidge at January 29, 2013 11:17 AM (VDovR)

255 ShitHead is a troll.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 29, 2013 11:17 AM (ZPrif)

256 thought that was Ohio's Farmers' daughters but we have "odd sccents" by modern Hispandering standards too ese

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:17 AM (LRFds)

257 216
For those thinking of New Zealand or Australia : beautiful places, but
the gun laws and pc are the same, in NZ's case, much worse.
==========
ON the up-side, owning a still is legal in NZ.

Posted by: RoyalOil at January 29, 2013 11:17 AM (imtbm)

258 One of the interesting things I've noticed lately is that many of the traditional illegals have migrated back to Mexico, because the US economy sucks.

Many of the people we see coming in now have been driven out of Mexico by the cartels. These are by and large people who owned businesses in Mexico, are educated, and who owned land.

The cartels are the equivalent of the Chicago mob in the 1930s, except that they are more willing to kill. They're demanding tribute from Mexican businesses and landowners. Those that don't pay are beaten or killed. The lucky ones make it to the US.

Oddly enough, the people coming to escape the cartels are exactly the kind of people we want in the US.

Posted by: Michael the Hobbit at January 29, 2013 11:17 AM (hzV1U)

259 Just need one more Repub. Not exactly like trying to fill an inside straight.


Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 29, 2013 11:14 AM (kdS6q)

I suspect they don't have all the Democrats either.

Posted by: Vic at January 29, 2013 11:17 AM (53z96)

260 #247 Those Calagary girls make me sing and shout.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 11:18 AM (wbmaj)

261 There are far better ways to solving border enforcement than by simply building a wall. You can build a wall where it makes sense, but unless you take other steps, the wall will be breached. I preferr Rick Perry's plan to Michelle Bachman's plan.

Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 11:18 AM (gmeXX)

262 253 Buzzsaw90,

Yeah....I'll just die my hair and fake a bad Fwench accent....

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:18 AM (LRFds)

263 On day one of our bill, the people without status who are not criminals or security risks

In other words, none of them. By definition.

Posted by: t-bird at January 29, 2013 11:18 AM (FcR7P)

264 sing all the lyrics to 2112

Check!

"We have assumed control....we have assumed control..."

Posted by: EC at January 29, 2013 11:18 AM (GQ8sn)

265 #247 That would be Calgary.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 11:18 AM (wbmaj)

266 They don't care if you work legally or not until they decide to care.
Posted by: RioBravo at January 29, 2013 11:14 AM (eEfYn)


True, I was amazed to find this. They offer ITIN numbers for that purpose. They specifically say it's basically a no-questions-asked type of thing and the only way an ITIN gets refused is if you are legally elegible to get a SS number. The IRS figures if other agencies are not going to bother trying to deport, they should at least try to collect taxes.

Posted by: Heralder at January 29, 2013 11:19 AM (+xmn4)

267 The basic premise seems to be that new Hispanic immigrants will gravitate to conservativism since most of them are Catholics.


Unfortunately, many of them are the kind of Catholic who think all it takes is going to confession after they just assassinated someone one behalf of the drug cartel.

We have been trying to push this approach for 30+ years and it has never become a reality.

Really? Who has been "pushing" mass deportation? I know that Democrats claim we are, but who has actually been doing it. Every time the conversation has come up in my living memory (and it seems to come up every few years) the proponents of enforcing our fucking laws say "Enforce the fucking laws first. Once that's done, then we can consider what to do with the ones who are already hear." Then the fucking liars on the Left go out and scream from the rooftops "They want to deport your babies!"

And then people like you buy into their rhetoric.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 11:19 AM (8y9MW)

268 Of course, once America goes full socialist, we might as well start expanding again. Add Canada, Cuba. Add Mexico. Fuck it.

Since America as a source of human liberty is dead, at least get some empire thrill.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 29, 2013 11:19 AM (ZPrif)

269 211
Arm yourselves. The shit will be hitting the fan soon. Why else would
DHS buy BILLIONS of rounds of ammo. They are preparing for war and I
don't think it will be against the illegals.


Posted by: TC

Nice of Dubya to create that DHS in response to 19 Arabs with box cutters.

Posted by: SFGoth at January 29, 2013 11:19 AM (dZ756)

270 Illegal immigrants are not “undocumented.”

You're counting the little "I Voted" stickers.

Posted by: t-bird at January 29, 2013 11:20 AM (FcR7P)

271 Georgetown, Delaware has been renamed "Jorgetown."

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 11:20 AM (wbmaj)

272 Oddly enough, the people coming to escape the cartels are exactly the kind of people we want in the US.

Posted by: Michael the Hobbit at January 29, 2013 11:17 AM (hzV1U)


YES. The people who's very first acts are to break the law (they crossed illegally and are using fraudulent identities) are exactly who I want as the citizenry.

Posted by: BCochran1981 at January 29, 2013 11:20 AM (da5Wo)

273 >>> We can't deport 11 million people

I've always been a fan of the "Hazleton (PA) Solution" for this problem:

-If you employ an illegal alien you are subject to a fine or imprisonment.

-If you rent an apartment to an illegal alien you are subject to a fine or imprisonment.

Once they get it into their heads that there's no work and no place to live they leave- no need to deport anybody.

But that works, so I guess it's racist or something...

Posted by: Nighthawk at January 29, 2013 11:20 AM (RSqz2)

274 My Idea:

Need to pay a cumulative total of $50,000 in Federal Taxes before you become eligible for citizenship. That way only people who've reached middle class can get the right to vote.

Posted by: Serious Cat at January 29, 2013 11:20 AM (UypUQ)

275 The issue is making deportation a political reality.
Posted by: dan-O at January 29, 2013 11:15 AM (kuRCh)

It worked in those cities / states that enacted laws or enforced laws against benefits, employment and housing for illegal aliens. Again, they self deported, at least out of that area.

Posted by: polynikes at January 29, 2013 11:20 AM (m2CN7)

276 I'm actually at the desperate point of hoping that whatever shit sandwich Obama is proposing in Vegas is so bad that it not only dies in Congress, it's stink kills this shit sandwich as well.

Incompetence and overreach by a narcissistic sociopath -- our last hope.

Posted by: angienc at January 29, 2013 11:20 AM (w3JGl)

277 I'd also think this should be noted--if this blog is in anyway indicative, then the lack of effect of the presence of Flake or Rubio should show that for a segment, they don't follow people, they follow principle.

If "only Nixon can go to China", then they ain't Nixon.

Posted by: J. at January 29, 2013 11:20 AM (D5Jpp)

278 off! ok?

Posted by: Serious Cat at January 29, 2013 11:20 AM (UypUQ)

Posted by: Nighthawk at January 29, 2013 11:20 AM (RSqz2)

280 258 Michael the Hobbit,

yeah um....

"yeah" I notice a lot of Rotary Club drive in east LA and Brownsville....

"yeah"

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:20 AM (LRFds)

281
I'm not sure where this 11 million number comes from. That is the number of Illegals in California alone. LA has 3.5 million by itself.

I'm confident that the number is much closer to 30 million, and that is not only hispanics...

And, to question of who is punished by the system? Go look in the mirror.

Posted by: Gunslinger at January 29, 2013 11:21 AM (4S7hN)

282 I hope Marco Rubio likes being a member of the Senate. This will not be forgotten, this will not be forgiven.

Posted by: Steven at January 29, 2013 11:21 AM (5p6MR)

283 Oh, an LIV Hispanic told me after the election how great it was the rise in Hispanic votes as per the exit polls he saw on CNN.

Fuckity, fuckity, fuck.

You see where they were going with that "news" now, don't you?

That was the big lie to scare the easily scared RINOs into supporting amnesty.


Posted by: RoyalOil at January 29, 2013 11:21 AM (imtbm)

284 Aw crap!

**takes newspaper, stalks off towards barrel**

Posted by: Nighthawk at January 29, 2013 11:21 AM (RSqz2)

285 So....

How many of you still feel like digging through Rubio's garbage, looking for used panty liners and discarded hair plugs?

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 29, 2013 11:21 AM (W4Q1C)

286 Nice of Dubya to create that DHS in response to 19 Arabs with box cutters.
Posted by: SFGoth at January 29, 2013 11:19 AM (dZ756)

Your sarcasm humor needs work.

Posted by: polynikes at January 29, 2013 11:21 AM (m2CN7)

287 266 Heralder,

and they don't care how much CTC or EITC fraud you commit either....

trust me I know....

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:21 AM (LRFds)

288 SESSIONS: I've concluded that John Morton, top immigration law enforcement officer, "can no longer effectively serve at his post." (1/2)

"Perhaps more importantly, there can be no comprehensive immigration reform as long as he's the person charged with enforcing it." (2/2)

-----


U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz Statement on Immigration Reform Proposal


Contact: (202) 228-0462 / press@cruz.senate.gov
Monday, January 28, 2013

WASHINGTON, DC -- U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) issued the following statement regarding today’s bipartisan immigration reform proposal:

I appreciate the good work that senators in both parties have put into trying to fix our broken immigration system. There are some good elements in this proposal, especially increasing the resources and manpower to secure our border and also improving and streamlining legal immigration. However, I have deep concerns with the proposed path to citizenship. To allow those who came here illegally to be placed on such a path is both inconsistent with rule of law and profoundly unfair to the millions of legal immigrants who waited years, if not decades, to come to America legally.

---

Congressman Steve King released the following statement today following the press conference held by the Senate 'Gang of Eight' who announced their broad proposals for comprehensive immigration reform:

"Eight Senators have now agreed to four basic legislative pillars or immigration policy principles," said King. "They have 52 more Senators and 218 House Members to convince after they put their plan on paper in the form of a bill. I agree with most of the language in the very broad guidelines.

I would ask the Senators, do you agree with me that the United States should have an enforced immigration policy designed to enhance the economic, social, and cultural well being of the United States of America? Do you believe the Rule of Law and national sovereignty are essential components of a successful nation? Do you believe employers should be allowed to deduct wages and benefits paid to illegal aliens as a business expense? I'm guessing the 'Gang of Eight' would be inclined to agree with me on my principles. But, I predict that they will oppose my every effort to get them into law.

The president has demonstrated he will only enforce the laws that he likes. Promises of future law enforcement made under the 1986 Amnesty Act were not adequately kept by President Reagan. Why, then, would Americans accept the promise of this president?

I will continue to promote positive, common sense reforms that address our problems with illegal immigration, including reintroducing the New IDEA (Illegal Deduction Elimination Act) in the 113th Congress and I will continue to support enforcement of our existing laws.

---

Mike Lee:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/
2013/01/28/why-mike-lee-quit-the-gang-of-eight/

Posted by: Y-not at January 29, 2013 11:22 AM (5H6zj)

289 Posted by: Nighthawk at January 29, 2013 11:20 AM (RSqz2)

You. Barrel.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 11:22 AM (8y9MW)

290 #281 So right. Eleven million my ass. Double it and keep counting.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 11:22 AM (wbmaj)

291 Asset forfeiture of businesses or personages caught employing illegals, just as the case with drug laws. It would take care of the issue overnight,mwith no harshness towards our illegal friends.
_____

I would not want to give the federal government more avenues for asset forfeiture.

Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 11:22 AM (gmeXX)

292 Barrel time

Posted by: Vic at January 29, 2013 11:22 AM (53z96)

293 I'm not really sure what we do. All of these masturbatory fantasies about moats and bounties and mass deportation are just wastes of mental energy. Yes, lets seal the border better and yes lets reform the visa system (since thats how some 40% of illegals get in), but beyond that, what can we actually do? Like someone upthread pointed out, we lost when we let them come in. Demographics are destiny, start looking for a place to move, I just cant envision ever having a conservative majority again short of a foreign crisis.

Posted by: BSR: Live from Falls Church at January 29, 2013 11:22 AM (CBCxo)

294
258One of the interesting things I've noticed lately is that many of the traditional illegals have migrated back to Mexico, because the US economy sucks.

Here's the deal: live in America for ten years and send home half or more of the money you earn. You buy property and most likely a small buiseness.You build what in your new neighborhood is a mansion. Return home and live like a friggin' king among your friends and family.

Posted by: Cicero Kid at January 29, 2013 11:22 AM (m0v2L)

295 Btw, an interesting experiment would be to deny all benefits to illegals yet allow them to work anywhere they want. According to our theories, they should out perform thier US socio-economic counterparts without the safety-hammock sapping their drive.

Posted by: Serious Cat at January 29, 2013 11:23 AM (UypUQ)

296 I don't think they let me in...I pack a gone.

Posted by: Slo Poke Rodriguez at January 29, 2013 11:23 AM (d4vjp)

297 I think building a fence is a terrible idea. Why? Because it will be costly, it will not work, and frankly I just wince at the idea of living inside a wall. Now the third point is only a minor one, but something I think we as conservatives should really consider. If you told me that a fence would abosultely work, then ok. But I have strong doubts that it would work.
...
Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 11:07 AM (gmeXX)

Who is saying a fence is the only solution? A fence is ONE part of a multi-tier security plan.

What is more expensive? Building a fence or allowing more people to come in illegally and collect welfare and free medical.

PS: You already live inside of a fence. Try to leave the country without a passport.

Posted by: blindside at January 29, 2013 11:24 AM (x7g7t)

298 ‏@TwitchyTeam
Rep. Lamar Smith on senate immigration plan: 'I don't see much good for Americans here' http://bit.ly/VtRfPy

Posted by: Y-not at January 29, 2013 11:24 AM (5H6zj)

299
Hannity:“Can I characterize that, if you don’t get enforcement first, or securing the borders first, is that a deal killer for you?”


Rubio:“Oh, absolutely. Yeah. Because we will be
right back here again. I want to deal with this permanently. And by the
way, I think the vast majority of people in both parties would agree
with me on that point. No one ever wants to have to do this again. I
mean, no one is happy about the fact that we have 11 million people here
who are undocumented. This is something that should never ever happen
again. But the decisions that were made that led to this happened when I
was in ninth grade. That was a long time ago. And now we have to deal
with it so that it never happens again.

Posted by: Marcus at January 29, 2013 11:25 AM (GGCsk)

300 Stop the crazy train.. I would like to get off.

Posted by: Jumbo Shrimp at January 29, 2013 11:25 AM (DGIjM)

301
Looking at the picture from a slightlydifferent angle.
America already props Mexico up to an amazing degree. The amount the illegals send back and what the churches here do. Every weekend, each church on the border sends high schoolers and others across to do work for orphanages and to do medical help.

Mexico "mission giving" is a huge deal in most southwestern churches.

That's not even enough though. It's never enough.

Posted by: Who Knows at January 29, 2013 11:25 AM (W+Itt)

302 they can get a taxpayer ID number (TID) to use on tax returns.

Because you can't get the EITC check without filing a return.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at January 29, 2013 11:25 AM (ZKzrr)

303 They'll still apply for 10 different ID's since they tend to drink and drive, so toss it and get another license. A background check for employment and credit checks for loans go by social security number

Politicians, activists, and journalists would know this shit if they lived in the real world.

Cops could tell you about it, but I'm sure the senior level hacks will be cheering for amnesty just like they fap to gun control and federal drone funding




Posted by: kbdabear at January 29, 2013 11:26 AM (wwsoB)

304 Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 11:18 AM (gmeXX)

Troll.

Posted by: eman at January 29, 2013 11:26 AM (jp2Ur)

305 I hope Marco Rubio likes being a member of the Senate. This will not be forgotten, this will not be forgiven

.....

A few of us tweeted yesterday:

I may not be able to cast a vote against @JohnMcCain or @GrahamBlog, but I can vote against you, @MarcoRubio. Please tread carefully.

Insert your own Senators/Reps as applies.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 29, 2013 11:26 AM (W4Q1C)

306 Just spitballing here, but why don't we ask for a quid pro quo from the Mexican government? We could, for example, demand that, in exchange for amnesty and relaxed green card legislation, that the process for attaining Mexican citizenship, which is currently one of the most difficult to achieve on the planet, becomes easily accessible to Americans--particularly our senior citizens. Just a thought.

Posted by: troyriser at January 29, 2013 11:26 AM (vtiE6)

307 The fence is a bad idea only in that it permanently cedes a massive amount of land to Mexico. You cant build a fence directly on a border it has to be set back a bit, that leaves a swath of land that is just given to Mexico.

Furthermore, a fence is only as good as the people guarding it. Without the armed guards and security towers, the Berlin wall wasnt worth shit. Just putting up a fence without any other means of patrol is stupid.

Posted by: BSR: Live from Falls Church at January 29, 2013 11:26 AM (CBCxo)

308 299 Marcus,

yeah damn if only Rubio were King of the world and Juan Queeg hadn't admitted that enforcement is a judgement call by DHS and that the blue ribbon panel is non binding.

Tell you what YOU let the illegals human wave the United States and let those states that want to leave the United States go....


then we'll cave

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:26 AM (LRFds)

309 What I would like to see for punishment for those who knowingly hire illegals or use reckless disregard in hiring.

1st off: $500 fine per illegal
2nd off: 1 year in jail
3rd off: 5 years in jail (felony)
4th off: Business forfeiture and 15 to 20 years in jail

For the illegals deportation to home country 1st off. Second off deportation to furtherest known land in American hemisphere (Jaun sometinganother defuca?)
3rd off: Death penalty

That will stop it.

Posted by: Vic at January 29, 2013 11:26 AM (53z96)

310
and they don't care how much CTC or EITC fraud you commit either....

trust me I know....
Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:21 AM (LRFds)


That's proabably the case. The idea of saving at least some vestige of face with the ITIN number and taxing illegals is nice and all, but how many illegal immigrants are even going to look to know that's the case, and for those who do look, given they're breaking the law just by being here - why would they want to pay taxes?
I imagine it's not overall that successful an idea.

Posted by: Heralder at January 29, 2013 11:27 AM (+xmn4)

311 Who is saying a fence is the only solution? A fence is ONE part of a multi-tier security plan. What is more expensive? Building a fence or allowing more people to come in illegally and collect welfare and free medical. PS: You already live inside of a fence. Try to leave the country without a passport.

_____

Actually quite a few people seem to simply say build a fence. I have said I support increased border enforcement. I just think a fence is a terrible way to do it.

You are correct on your last statement. But there is something symbolic about a fence along a border. To me it is something totalitarian communist states do (yes for a different purpose, to keep their people in). It is something I would prefer to avoid. Now maybe that must yield to the reality of the world.

Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 11:28 AM (gmeXX)

312 Ha! I had to drop something off for work and I successfully parallel parked! Ha!

That's right, fear my incredible mild competency. Fear. It.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Team Stompy. at January 29, 2013 11:28 AM (VtjlW)

313 306 Troyriser,

or we could just you know mount a military fucking invasion of Chihuahua, Sonora, Cohulia, and Baja Mexifornia and put the finishing touches on Mexopolis' "addition by subtraction....

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:28 AM (LRFds)

314
Some people here don't understand incrementalism.



They should work on that deficiency.

Posted by: Meremortal, watching it burn at January 29, 2013 11:28 AM (1Y+hH)

315 I keep hearing that we NEED to do something about all the illegals in the US because they're living in the shadows or something.

My question is: Why, exactly, do we need to Do Something?

Sympathy for lawbreakers? To protect businesses who hire illegals from prosecution? Why?

Amnesty (and Drew is right, this is amnesty) does nothing to prevent illegal immigration to continue being a problem. Pass amnesty today, and tomorrow illegals will still be coming in.

And no, a committee voting to deem the border secure does not make it so.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 29, 2013 11:28 AM (SY2Kh)

316 True story: we've befriended a family who owned a beauty supply business in Mexico. They were driven out by the cartel because they couldn't pay the tribute.

The husband's brother also owns a business in Monterrey. One of the cartels asked them to pay the equivalent of $100,000 for protection. The man could only come up with $40,000 and promised to pay later.

A few days later, one of his daughters disappeared. He again begged the cartel to give him time to come up with the rest of the money.

After a week, the man found a box on his front porch that contained the body of his daughter from the chest up. The cartel included a note: "You paid half of the money, so here's half of your daughter."

The situation in Mexico is much, much worse than the mainstream media is reporting.

Posted by: Michael the Hobbit at January 29, 2013 11:28 AM (hzV1U)

317
Nice of Dubya to create that DHS in response to 19 Arabs with box cutters.
Posted by: SFGoth at January 29, 2013 11:19 AM (dZ756)

"Your sarcasm humor needs work. "


I thought the humor was executed quite well. The fact it ain't funny isn't SFGoth's fault. It's the subject matter.

I'm sure German Jews had similar problems with their jokes about the SA.

Posted by: Jaws at January 29, 2013 11:28 AM (4I3Uo)

318 >>>Need to pay a cumulative total of $50,000 in Federal Taxes
before you become eligible for citizenship. That way only people who've
reached middle class can get the right to vote.

I am for the Starship Troopers solution. Want to vote? Run for office? Serve. The military will slot you to where they think you'll work the best with the physical condition and mental abilities you have. Complete your service, get citizenship.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 11:29 AM (0q2P7)

319 I'm hoping this is just a CYA for Rubio to tell people "well, I tried" and that he'll pull out of the deal once the dems FUBAR it

Posted by: BSR: Live from Falls Church at January 29, 2013 11:29 AM (CBCxo)

320 Well Obama just said he won't sign anything with an enforcement component in it, basically killing the deal. They don't want a deal. They just want to pound Republicans as racist and keep the hispanics riled up.

Posted by: Iblis at January 29, 2013 11:29 AM (U0ndG)

321 look, given they're breaking the law just by being here - why would they want to pay taxes?

Pay? Lol. You only claim enough income to get the EITC check. Like strippers.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at January 29, 2013 11:29 AM (ZKzrr)

322 If not a fence, can we just do landmines?

Posted by: Jean at January 29, 2013 11:29 AM (R4WsQ)

323
I'm not really sure what we do. All of these masturbatory fantasies about moats and bounties and mass deportation are just wastes of mental energy.
Posted by: BSR




No one ever seems to discuss this, but:

The Mexican Repatriation refers to a mass migration that took place between 1929 and 1939, when as many as 500,000 people of Mexican descent were forced or pressured to leave the US. The State of California passed an "Apology Act" that estimated 2 million people were forced to relocate to Mexico and an estimated 1.2 million were US citizens. Authors Balderrama and Rodriguez have estimated that the total number of repatriates was about one million.

And that in an era with rudimentary record keeping and identity tracking. Improve, innovate, scale up and implement.



Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 29, 2013 11:29 AM (kdS6q)

324 Is it 5:00 yet? All this talk of amnesty makes me want a margarita. I do not like what is happening in politics today. When are we going to get our country back? Somebody tell me it's going to get better. And when.

Posted by: ALH at January 29, 2013 11:29 AM (yAPdC)

325 Fences will not work.period.end


Fences and wall are like locks. They are devices to keep honest people out unless monitored by someone providing security. Then they act as a time delay to allow security to respond. The better the fence, the few people assets you need.


We will never have enough people to monitor a fence as long as needed for this. The only way to stop the flow is remove the incentives for the illegals (jobs and welfare) and increase the punishment for people hiring them.

Posted by: Vic at January 29, 2013 11:29 AM (53z96)

326 Posted by: Y-not at January 29, 2013 11:22 AM (5H6zj)

Ted Cruz hates spanish-speaking people (I refuse to use the word 'hispanic' as that is another Nixonian creation...rot in Hell Richard Nixon).

Posted by: blindside at January 29, 2013 11:29 AM (x7g7t)

327 One thing that worries me isthat the fining employers proposal, if enacted without enough lead-time would lead to some serious economic difficuties.
California growers can'thire a million mexicans to pick the crops. How much of those crops will rot on the vine? Landscaping, construction, any industryindustries that rely heavily on illegal labor could get devastated at implementation.




Posted by: Buzzsaw90 at January 29, 2013 11:29 AM (SO2Q8)

328 310 Heralder,

oh in their hearts donkey ass motherucker knows this that is why the always add in "they PAY SALES TAX....THEY PAY SALES TAX!'

uh yeah they pay a tiny portion of their services used on the local and county level...maybe a tiny bit of state as well...

"yeah"

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:29 AM (LRFds)

329 Eman - Buzz off.

Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 11:30 AM (gmeXX)

330
Posted by: troyriser at January 29, 2013 11:26 AM (vtiE6)

Because fuck you, that's why. We don't owe you gringos anything.

Posted by: Mexican Government at January 29, 2013 11:30 AM (m0v2L)

331
#316
I'm sorry the situation is so bad there.

That's a large part of not wanting it imported.

Posted by: Who Knows at January 29, 2013 11:30 AM (W+Itt)

332
We can't deport 11 million illegals!
Back in the late 70's I remeber seeing a cartoon showing a door-to-door pollster standing at a gentleman's front door talking to said gentleman. The caption had the gentleman saying, "How do we knowno country can win a global thermo-nuclear war unless we have one and find out."
Well, in that same vein, how do we know if 11 million illegals can't be deported unless we try it!

Posted by: calvinronald reagancoolidge at January 29, 2013 11:30 AM (VDovR)

333 With these amnesty plans, they are asking us to change this Country forever. After this blanket amnesty, no one will stop the next 11 to 20 million illegal aliens, no one. That's a fact. If they are trying to kick us while we are down, which is what they are doing, we need to get back up and fight.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 11:30 AM (wbmaj)

334
312
Ha! I had to drop something off for work and I successfully parallel parked! Ha!



That's right, fear my incredible mild competency. Fear. It.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Team Stompy. at January 29, 2013 11:28 AM (VtjlW)


My college issued 3 times as many parking passes as it had spaces. Successful parallel parking is not mild competency, it can be an essential life skill.

Posted by: BCochran1981 at January 29, 2013 11:30 AM (da5Wo)

335 I am for the Starship Troopers solution. Want to vote? Run for office?
Serve. The military will slot you to where they think you'll work the
best with the physical condition and mental abilities you have. Complete
your service, get citizenship.



Franchise.

Posted by: EC at January 29, 2013 11:30 AM (GQ8sn)

336 Of course, amnesty is just an acceleration of what we do every year.

We add 1.1M new legal residents every year. Obama has increased that # during the Great Recession. He's also cut European immigration in half and double immigration from Africa.

Of the 1.1M we add every single year about 80-90% are leftists.

Our current immigration policy is slow suicide for the Right. Amnesty is just accelerating that.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 29, 2013 11:30 AM (ZPrif)

337 I don't know why we don't just take Mexico for our own. Baja would surely be able to be taken in about an hour. Then we have a nice harbor and another , what, 2000 miles of coastland? Lets just take it.

Posted by: Whatev at January 29, 2013 11:30 AM (A7Wh1)

338 The Supreme Judicial Court ruled today Massachusetts residents do not have a Constitutional right to keep loaded handguns in unlocked bedside drawers.

The ruling by the state's highest court upholds a state law that requires gun owners to either store guns in locked containers or equip them with locking mechanisms when they're not under their "immediate control."

The ruling comes in the case of John McGowan, a Springfield resident who got into an argument with his roommate over a $10 loan in 2008. She grabbed his loaded gun out of his bedside drawer, went outside and threw it into some bushes. When he went out to retrieve the weapon, she locked him out and he called police, who, among other things, filed charges against him for not properly storing his weapon.

McGowan sued to get his gun back, arguing the law violates his Second Amendment rights and recent Supreme Court decisions that let somebody possess a gun for self protection.

The Supreme Judicial Court, however, ruled that the Second Amendment is no more absolute than the First, that even in its ruling on a Washington, DC ban on gun possession, the Supreme Court acknowledged the government can set certain restrictions on gun ownership; for example, by barring the sale of guns to felons or the mentally ill.

We have consistently held, without applying any level of heightened scrutiny, that the decisions in [the Supreme Court cases] did not invalidate laws that require a person to have a firearm identification card to possess a firearm in one's home or place of business, and to have a license to carry in order to possess a firearm elsewhere. ...

Nor did the decisions in [those cases] invalidate laws that prevent the sale of firearms to persons who have no firearms identification card and therefore are not authorized to possess a firearm. The Supreme Court in ]the Washington, DC case] specifically recognized that "laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms" are among the "presumptively lawful regulatory measures."

The court reached back to the pre-Constitution Shay's Rebellion in 1787 - in which the nascent Commonwealth required rebels to give up guns for three years to get a pardon - as an example of how the state has long sought to regulate guns.

In McGowan's case, the court ruled that, unlike in Washington, where a city law banned possession of guns in the home, Massachusetts allows gun ownership for self protection, even if it means the gun has to be locked up when not in the gun owner's hand, and that the state has a valid interest in reducing cases of accidental gunfire:

Even though the obligation to secure a firearm in [the state law] applies only where the gun owner chooses not to carry a firearm or keep it under his immediate control, the defendant suggests that the brief period of delay needed to unlock a secure storage container or trigger lock suffices to render this requirement in violation of the Second Amendment's right to self-defense in one's home. We disagree. The Supreme Court in [Heller, the Washington, DC case] specifically noted that its analysis did not "suggest the invalidity of laws regulating the storage of firearms to prevent accidents." The prevention of accidents by those not authorized to use firearms, as well as the prevention of crimes of violence and suicide by those not authorized to possess firearms, are among the evils that [the state law] is intended to prevent. Any law regulating the storage of firearms will delay to some degree the ability of a firearm owner to retrieve and fire the firearm in self-defense. If such a brief period of delay were sufficient to render the law unconstitutional, the Supreme Court in Heller would not have declared that its analysis did not suggest the invalidity of firearm storage laws

See the complete ruling, Commonwealth vs. John McGowan

Posted by: BlueFalcon in Boston at January 29, 2013 11:30 AM (KCvsd)

339 The situation in Mexico is much, much worse than the mainstream media is reporting.
Posted by: Michael the Hobbit at January 29, 2013 11:28 AM (hzV1U)

OMG.

Posted by: Jumbo Shrimp at January 29, 2013 11:31 AM (DGIjM)

340 Stop the crazy train... I would like to get off.
Next stop: Shit Head Junction!

Posted by: engineer joe biden at January 29, 2013 11:31 AM (ORGYc)

341 312Ha! I had to drop something off for work and I successfully parallel parked! Ha!

That's right, fear my incredible mild competency. Fear. It. Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Team Stompy. at January 29, 2013 11:28 AM (VtjlW)


Mind, "successful" is totally subjective.

Posted by: Heralder at January 29, 2013 11:31 AM (+xmn4)

342 Ahh, the old ankle-grab strategy.

Well played, Stupid Party!

Posted by: Andy at January 29, 2013 11:31 AM (C/NnJ)

343 We could solve the illegal immigration problem overnight, we just don't have the will.

How many North Koreans sneak into South Korea over the border? Yet we can't have that type of security for our own backyard? If we had a tenth of that MILITARY manpower, we'd have a sealed border.

If you went after businesses that hired illegal aliens, game over, half of them would be gone in a year. Cut off all public funding (which is supposed to be the law anyway) and the rest would eventually leave.

At the end of the day, I'm not pushing to remove every illegal alien, what I do insist on is a locked down border and no amnesty. I think the rest will work itself out.




Posted by: McAdams at January 29, 2013 11:31 AM (J/+6n)

344 We will never have enough people to monitor a fence as long as needed for this.

Hi.

Posted by: Unammed Helicopters With Cameras at January 29, 2013 11:31 AM (ZKzrr)

345 Assuming the Tea Party would oppose amnesty (which would be consistent with the ideological affiliation), this would serve as retaliation from both the Dems and the GOP moderates for upsetting the comity of Obama's 2008 election.

The tribes across the river saw that the Tea Party were earnest...and peaceful. While the Tea Party appeared to be a pivotal force, they don't incite fear in the vile left, who control our institutions.

Remember this one fact--the fights are no longer ideological...they're tribal. The election of 2012 proves this. If you think you're going to appeal to people's better angels, we're well past that. Undue deference to morality and institutions won't do you a whole heap of good. In war, there's only military expediency (at least historically, before the JAG set our military strategy).

Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at January 29, 2013 11:31 AM (Ec6wH)

346 Furthermore, a fence is only as good as the people guarding it. Without the armed guards and security towers, the Berlin wall wasnt worth shit. Just putting up a fence without any other means of patrol is stupid.
---
I'm sure that there are plenty of Mexicans willing to do the work as armed guards

Posted by: Buzzsaw90 at January 29, 2013 11:31 AM (SO2Q8)

347 316 Michael the Hobbit,

Gonna be a lot of out of work Military types....

"filibustering" anyone?

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:31 AM (LRFds)

348 238 Rio Bravo,

There have been a number of news articles on illegals obtaining ITNs and using them to receive largish tax refunds by claiming lots of dependents; thanks EIC. It costs us over $4 billion per year. Here's a Blaze article about it from 2012:

http://tinyurl.com/bdhwha7

Posted by: GnuBreed at January 29, 2013 11:32 AM (ccXZP)

349
312Ha! I had to drop something off for work and I successfully parallel parked!


No other cars parked on that side of the street, eh?

Posted by: Sweetah Ritah, Meetah maid. at January 29, 2013 11:32 AM (m0v2L)

350 Amnesty? Isn't that like the french word for friend or something?

Yes, I'm all for it! Who wouldn't want more friends?

Posted by: BurtTC at January 29, 2013 11:32 AM (TOk1P)

351 Posted by: Michael the Hobbit at January 29, 2013 11:28 AM (hzV1U)

That story should be used for the Gun Control debate.

Posted by: polynikes at January 29, 2013 11:32 AM (m2CN7)

352 My question is: Why, exactly, do we need to Do Something?
----

That is a very good question. I'm afraid that whatever that something is, it will be worse than what we have now. We may have a problem, but if the only solutions are worse than the problem, then we might as well turn our focus to something elese.

Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 11:32 AM (gmeXX)

353 If this punishes people who wait in line for legal citizenship, tell me again why Hispanics vote for Democrats--for the people who are punishing them, after their own long wait for legal citizenship?

Posted by: BeckoningChasm at January 29, 2013 11:32 AM (DuH+r)

354 Oh for fuck's sake. I can spell "Unmanned."

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at January 29, 2013 11:32 AM (ZKzrr)

355 258
One of the interesting things I've noticed lately is that many of the
traditional illegals have migrated back to Mexico, because the US
economy sucks.





Posted by: Michael the Hobbit at January 29, 2013 11:17 AM

They'll be back once they know they get Obamacare and a shiny new EBT card along with Section 8 housing vouchers

All which the Dems have assured us they will be happy to hand to them.

Any "background check" is a joke since those doing the checks will be accused of racism and back down

Background checkers will be too busy snooping around the homes of law abiding citizens for guns anyway

Posted by: kbdabear at January 29, 2013 11:32 AM (wwsoB)

356
Well Obama just said he won't sign anything with an enforcement component in it, basically killing the deal.

Posted by: Iblis




Oh come now. Let the shadow play run for a few months, sign a bill with minor enforcement, then EO that off or have a federal court find them in violation of an amendment to be named latter.....

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 29, 2013 11:33 AM (kdS6q)

357 re: "The Republican Establishment has convinced itself that millions of [...] Hispanic immigrants [...] are going to choose the GOP."

Let's assume you're wrong about that. Because you are. That assumed, because it's true, what does their behavior actually signify?

That the knowable economic, social, and political results of the "reform" they propose--and, perhaps more significantly, of the "conversation" that precedes it--are the results they desire.

For example, this way you (each of you, from "LOL losers!" to "Primary Rubio!" to "Look how racist you all are" to "USA, RIP") feel right now. They want it. It serves them.

Posted by: oblig. at January 29, 2013 11:33 AM (cePv8)

358 What I would like to see for punishment for those who knowingly hire illegals or use reckless disregard in hiring.

Posted by: Vic at January 29, 2013 11:26 AM (53z96)
==========

They did that in Hazleton PA back in 2006, but the laws never took effect because the ACLU still has the city in court over it.

Posted by: Nighthawk at January 29, 2013 11:33 AM (RSqz2)

359 I am for the Starship Troopers solution. Want to vote? Run for office? Serve. The military will slot you to where they think you'll work the best with the physical condition and mental abilities you have. Complete your service, get citizenship.

I prefer: want to vote or hold office? Pay taxes.

No taxation without representation. No representation without taxation.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 29, 2013 11:33 AM (bZKG0)

360 Really though, this is a great time to grant amnesty to 11-20 million new individuals. With the job market and economy chugging along briskly creating more and more jobs each month we are going to need the extra addition to our workforce.

Posted by: RWC at January 29, 2013 11:34 AM (fWAjv)

361 323:

I'm not saying it cant logistically be done. I'm saying it will not ever be done. Unless conservative republicans have the White House and 60 senate votes or a veto proof majority in congress, not to mention a couple more supreme court seats, the mass deportation fantasy is just that. In 2013 America there is simply no way to politically accomplish that task.

Posted by: BSR: Live from Falls Church at January 29, 2013 11:34 AM (CBCxo)

362 Ah, the troll ShitHead is telling eman to go away.
Good thing we have ShitHead as the new blog comment enforcer.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 29, 2013 11:34 AM (ZPrif)

363 >>>Hi.


>>>Posted by: Unammed Helicopters With Cameras

I fail to see how helicopters without a name solve that problem.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 11:34 AM (0q2P7)

364 I am for the Starship Troopers solution. Want to
vote? Run for office? Serve. The military will slot you to where they
think you'll work the best with the physical condition and mental
abilities you have. Complete your service, get citizenship.


Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 11:29 AM (0q2P7)


And I ask, as I always do when this comes up, what happens to people who are physically unable to serve? Or mentally? And do you really want to create an actual class system? That's pretty much the opposite of the ideals this country was founded on.

Posted by: BCochran1981 at January 29, 2013 11:34 AM (da5Wo)

365
They are conservatives because they are Catholic is one of the stupidest lines I hear in this debate. The Catholic Church is left wing, particularly in South America. It's also left wing in this country. Even with abortion as a Dem sacrament, the bishopsstand with the left wing pols.

Posted by: ejo at January 29, 2013 11:34 AM (GXvSO)

366 327 One thing that worries me isthat the fining employers proposal, if enacted without enough lead-time would lead to some serious economic difficuties.
California growers can'thire a million mexicans to pick the crops. How much of those crops will rot on the vine? Landscaping, construction, any industryindustries that rely heavily on illegal labor could get devastated at implementation.

Posted by: Buzzsaw90 at January 29, 2013 11:29 AM (SO2Q

Yeah, that sucks for these industries that have made bigger profits by hiring illegals for years (not to mention the subsidies they already receive from the government).

I guess they shouldn't have been breaking the law.

Fuck them.

Posted by: blindside at January 29, 2013 11:34 AM (x7g7t)

367 No taxation without representation. No representation without taxation.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 29, 2013 11:33 AM (bZKG0)

This this and this!

Posted by: RWC at January 29, 2013 11:35 AM (fWAjv)

368 >>>I prefer: want to vote or hold office? Pay taxes.

You know, there is no reason why we couldn't do both.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 11:35 AM (0q2P7)

369 Eman - Buzz off.
Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 11:30 AM (gmeXX)

Cranky troll.

Posted by: eman at January 29, 2013 11:35 AM (jp2Ur)

370 Flatbush please tell me how I'm a troll.

Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 11:35 AM (gmeXX)

371 337 I don't know why we don't just take Mexico for our own. Baja would surely be able to be taken in about an hour. Then we have a nice harbor and another , what, 2000 miles of coastland? Lets just take it.

---

Why stop there? I think the Panama canal would make for a defensible border.

Posted by: Buzzsaw90 at January 29, 2013 11:36 AM (SO2Q8)

372 Landscaping, construction, any industryindustries that rely heavily on illegal labor could get devastated at implementation.

The meatpacking industry seems to survive raids. They end up getting more applications from citizens than they have open spots.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at January 29, 2013 11:36 AM (ZKzrr)

373 "any industryindustries that rely heavily on illegal labor could get devastated at implementation. "

those industries break the law willfully now. why should they abide by any new immigration law that hits them for hiring illegals?

Posted by: we are so screwed, deliver us oh SMOD at January 29, 2013 11:36 AM (HEa5q)

374 Successful parallel parking is not mild competency, it can be an essential life skill.
Posted by: BCochran1981 at January 29, 2013 11:30 AM (da5Wo)



Yeah, it's the successful part that is generally an Area of Concern for me. I define success as a. not taking five minutes, b. not hitting anyone, c. not sticking half out into the street, d. not being sideways in the spot and e. not having to walk to the curb from the driver's side. Today I accomplished all of the above so go me!


Yes, I am celebrating this. It's the tiny, tiny victories in life that count and I will grab one where I can.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Team Stompy. at January 29, 2013 11:36 AM (VtjlW)

375 Hannity:“Can I characterize that, if you don’t get enforcement first, or securing the borders first, is that a deal killer for you?”


Rubio:“Oh, absolutely. Yeah. Because we will be
right back here again. I want to deal with this permanently.


Can't. Stop. Laughing.

Posted by: George Orwell what knows where thou concealest thy þr0n at January 29, 2013 11:36 AM (Lxw+T)

376 280 sven10077

Sorry, but I'm just reporting the facts about how much control the cartels have in Mexico and how they're terrorizing Mexican business and land owners.

Mexico is rapidly coming close to the tipping point, and I wouldn't be surprised to see another revolution within the next 5 years. It's on the point of becoming a narco-terrorist state.

I'm not in favor of amnesty any more than you are. Probably less so, since I see how illegals have gamed the system in Texas.

Don't interpret my sympathy for the plight of illegals as support for "comprehensive immigration reform" as the left is proposing. It would be a total disaster.

Posted by: Michael the Hobbit at January 29, 2013 11:37 AM (hzV1U)

377 365:

Correct. The catholic church in latin america has been co-opted by socialism for some time now. The idea that more latin american catholics will vote republican is nuts. Look at the exit polls.

Posted by: BSR: Live from Falls Church at January 29, 2013 11:37 AM (CBCxo)

378 We're next! Our "path back to citizenship" starts now.

Posted by: Convicted Felons at January 29, 2013 11:37 AM (FcR7P)

379 If this punishes people who wait in line for legal
citizenship, tell me again why Hispanics vote for Democrats--for the
people who are punishing them, after their own long wait for legal
citizenship?


Posted by: BeckoningChasm at January 29, 2013 11:32 AM (DuH+r)

Why would we ask the people who jump the border? Why don't you ask the people who are actually in line: Filipinos, Somalians, Europeans, etc.

Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at January 29, 2013 11:37 AM (xAtAj)

380 >>> Really? Who has been "pushing" mass deportation? I know that Democrats claim we are, but who has actually been doing it. Every time the conversation has come up in my living memory (and it seems to come up every few years) the proponents of enforcing our fucking laws say "Enforce the fucking laws first. Once that's done, then we can consider what to do with the ones who are already hear." Then the fucking liars on the Left go out and scream from the rooftops "They want to deport your babies!"

You sound like the dems claiming that they don't want to take away all guns, just "assault rifles".

Enforcing existing law means getting those who are here illegally out of the country. Yes, this is what many are fixated on. If you personally aren't in favor of moving the illegals back to their home country, but also are not in favor of letting them stay here legally, then I would love to hear what you think should be done.

Posted by: dan-O at January 29, 2013 11:38 AM (kuRCh)

381 Iowa Hawk sums it up:

David Burge ‏@iowahawkblog
Immigration reform in 5 words: line forms at the back.

Posted by: votermom at January 29, 2013 11:38 AM (tRl9M)

382 358 What I would like to see for punishment for those who knowingly hire illegals or use reckless disregard in hiring.

Posted by: Vic at January 29, 2013 11:26 AM (53z96)

We have a new law in Indiana. My son has worked 2 places that had to get rid of half their workers because they are illegal.
he cleaned offices after school for one job and he works at a fast food restaurant now.

Posted by: Jumbo Shrimp at January 29, 2013 11:38 AM (DGIjM)

383 367 --- That's an elegantly perfect solution.

How are people lacking the ability or skills to provide for themselves smart enough to decide the direction of the country.

Posted by: gigg at January 29, 2013 11:39 AM (41VCE)

384
The cartels already probe the border constantly.
The north of Mexico is a narco-terrorist state today.
This is the reality. Today is the day. No need to wait and see. It is here.

Posted by: Who Knows at January 29, 2013 11:39 AM (W+Itt)

385 376 Michael the Hobbit,

The US could solve Mexico's 'cartel problem" in a year.

Mexico does not want the problem solved because they cannot stand the thought of "needing help."

You grant amnesty you will have weaponized race and tribal impulse in this nation just like it is down in mexopolis.

You turn ownership into a violent exercise here I am gonna get to work playing cowboys and collectivists.

Scan me?

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:39 AM (LRFds)

386 357 -

I think there is strong evidence the R party leadership has resigned itself to permanent minority status that preserves their leadership roles in the party.

They want to cut out those pesky Tea Party types. If there is some other explanation that makes more sense, I've yet to hear it.

Posted by: BurtTC at January 29, 2013 11:39 AM (TOk1P)

387 258 kdabear

Yep, I agree with you that the illegals will be back once Obama promises them free shit. The Democrats will encourage people to come here illegally Heck, they already do.

Posted by: Michael the Hobbit at January 29, 2013 11:39 AM (hzV1U)

388 I think Rubio is right that we do have de facto amnesty now. About the only thing illegals can't do is vote. They get everything else. They get free healthcare, free education, jobs (often without paying taxes). If caught they will not be deported except for a minority of circumstances. How is that not de facto amnesty?

I disagree with Rubio's solution. Going from de facto amnesty to full blown amnesty is not a solution.

Posted by: Andrew at January 29, 2013 11:40 AM (HS3dy)

389 More importantly, what enterprising country will be the first to start directly marketing expatriation services to displeased conservatives? There's gotta be someone with a Harvard MBA in some banana republic somewhere that's putting the finishing touches on an advertising campaign.

Please tell me it's going to be somewhere warm.

Posted by: akula51 at January 29, 2013 11:40 AM (YesJa)

390 It's a little two-faced to say:

"we'll deal with amnesty after we enforce the laws on the books", since by definition if we enforce the laws, they will all be back in Mexico.

I'd say this:
"Deport all felonous(is that a word?) illegals, drive new illegal immigration somewhere near zero, THEN we can talk amnesty.

Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at January 29, 2013 11:40 AM (xAtAj)

391 My dad is an immigrant. Came here in 1965.
He had to take a citizen class to learn our history and promise to never be a burden on society.
his citizen papers have hung on my parents family room wall ever since.

Posted by: Jumbo Shrimp at January 29, 2013 11:40 AM (DGIjM)

392 a civil war in mexico would open the floodgates for refugees fleeing north. and by civil war i mean the narco cartels just making who owns that country official. now if we beat them to our own civil war will most of the illegals flee back south? after all if the big attraction is jobs and stability those both vanish once the feds start shooting at their own citizens.

Posted by: we are so screwed, deliver us oh SMOD at January 29, 2013 11:41 AM (HEa5q)

393 And I ask, as I always do when this comes up, what happens to people who are physically unable to serve? Or mentally?

Paraphrasing: "Oh, we never find anyone unfit. We're not allowed to. You could be bind and dumb and we'd find something- counting the hairs on caterpillars by touch, maybe. The only way to get a downcheck is to fail the psych evaluation."

And, yes, if you're going to set up the SST solution, that's what you'd have to do. Even the most mentally retarded person is capable of doing something. So is the most physically disabled. Allow them to serve out their term doing (uncomfortable, difficult, and often boring) make-work if necessary.

The other option, as someone else said- you only get to vote if you pay net taxes.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 11:41 AM (8y9MW)

394
Posted by: akula51 at January 29, 2013 11:40 AM (YesJa)

Ehem.

Posted by: Republic of the Philippines at January 29, 2013 11:41 AM (m0v2L)

395 Enforcing existing law means getting those who are here illegally out of the country. Yes, this is what many are fixated on.


Fixated? Yes. You are correct. I do have a pesky tendency to fixate on that mysterious concept of the Rule of Law.


*chin on hands* Please, by all means, explain to me how it is that I am the terrible evil awful no good mean person because I believe that those who break the law should face the consequences of their actions. Do go on.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Team Stompy. at January 29, 2013 11:42 AM (VtjlW)

396 >>>And I ask, as I always do when this comes up, what happens to people who
are physically unable to serve? Or mentally? And do you really want to
create an actual class system? That's pretty much the opposite of the
ideals this country was founded on.

As far as physically. If your physical condition means you get a desk job. Then a good able bodies soldier gets freed up to go to the field.

As far as mentally. If you lack the mental capacity to serve, why on earth should you be allowed to vote?

As far as universal suffrage being a founding principal. No it wasn't. Universal rights yes. Suffrage no. As far as philosophy on democratic processes, one thing that both Plato and Aristotle agreed on is that not everyone was capable of being a responsible Citizen and participating in governance. The difference being magnitude. Plato thought there were damn few people (Hence the current leftist thought) and they should run everything. Aristotle thought that *most* people could, but thought preconditions needed to apply (For him, you had to be 1. Armed and capable of being called to the militia, 2. have enough money that you weren't simply participating to look for handouts)

At this point I am inclined to agree with Aristotle, including the entire body of people in your electorate is a good way to make sure mankind's most base nature rules the priority of government.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 11:42 AM (0q2P7)

397
This problem will end. Given the direction we are heading, eventually there will be no difference in conditions north or south of the border.


At that point the needto invade will end.


Once again, being old has it's advantages.

Posted by: Meremortal, watching it burn at January 29, 2013 11:42 AM (1Y+hH)

398
Impliment the Fair Tax Plan and offer free transportation to anyone who wants to live and work in the U.S.

Posted by: jwest at January 29, 2013 11:42 AM (ZDsRL)

399 81 The GOP and the Democrats are a tag team. The Reagan/Gingrich Disturbance has been neutralized. Back to your huts, serfs!

Why does Reagan get a pass on IRCA and EMTALA while a conservative like Jeff Flake is labelled a RINO for his position on this issue? You cannot have it both ways.

Posted by: 80sBaby at January 29, 2013 11:43 AM (YjDyJ)

400 While we do need to better protect the border- a combination of manpower, physical barriers, technology, etc- it does nothing to stop those who come here on legal visas, but then remain illegally.

We need some form of mandatory E-Verify type of system. No more "I didn't know that my employee with a ridiculously obvious fake ID and inability to speak any English was illegal" excuses.

Yes, I've heard the objection- "But Hollowpoint, that mandates that private employers enforce federal law!"

My retort- True, but so what?

The private sector already does this every hour of every day. When you bought your first gun from a gun shop, was it an ATF agent performing the federal NICS check, or was it the store clerk?

When you bought your first six pack of beer, was it state cop who checked your ID, or was it the liquor store cashier? When you got your first job, did you file the tax paperwork with the IRS and SSA, or was it your employer? There are countless more examples.

Make it nearly impossible for all but the under the table types working farm fields and suburban gardens for cash to get a job and collect benefits here. Then we'll talk "pathway to citizenship". Not before.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 29, 2013 11:43 AM (SY2Kh)

401 those industries break the law willfully now. why should they abide by any new immigration law that hits them for hiring illegals?
---
At some point it can also become unwillful. If i run a landscaping business and follow the law i get underbid on contracts. Now my choices are
a) Go out of business
b) mimic my competitors and hire illegals
the effect of letting the contagion into the system

Posted by: Buzzsaw90 at January 29, 2013 11:43 AM (SO2Q8)

402 380:

Plenty of people on this thread have called for mass deportation, along with bounties being placed on illegals, among other fantastical ideas. My only point is that these King-for-a-day fantasies are a waste of mental energy.

Posted by: BSR: Live from Falls Church at January 29, 2013 11:43 AM (CBCxo)

403
If this punishes people who wait in line for legal citizenship, tell me
again why Hispanics vote for Democrats--for the people who are punishing
them, after their own long wait for legal citizenship?


Posted by: BeckoningChasm at January 29, 2013 11:32 AM (DuH+r)

Because they've already gotten past the hurdle. The ones being hurt can't vote. (And since they're already following the rules by waiting, I'm going to posit that they won't break the law to vote either.)

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 29, 2013 11:43 AM (oG3dE)

404 368 >>>I prefer: want to vote or hold office? Pay taxes.

You know, there is no reason why we couldn't do both.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 11:35 AM (0q2P7)


I didn't serve in the military. I pay taxes.

Should John Forbes Kerry get a vote and I just sit quietly while the Praetorian Guard decide how to spend my money?

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 29, 2013 11:44 AM (hjRtO)

405 Why can't we raise the stakes a bit. 11 million souls for their Baja Peninsula. I here its beautiful.

Posted by: dananjcon at January 29, 2013 11:44 AM (jvd3N)

406
And I ask, as I always do when this comes up, what happens to people who are physically unable to serve? Or mentally? And do you really want to create an actual class system? That's pretty much the opposite of the ideals this country was founded on.

Posted by: BCochran1981



<snip> no citizen who wants to enlist can be turned down for any reason, except for lacking the mental competence to understand the decision. The doctor giving Juan his induction physical examination makes this plain:

[quote]
I asked one of the doctors what percentage of the victims flunked the physical. He looked startled. “Why, we never fail anyone. The law doesn’t permit us to.”

“Huh? I mean, excuse me, Doctor? Then what’s the point of this goose-flesh parade?”

“Why, the purpose is […] to find out what duties you are physically able to perform. […] The only way you can fail is by having the psychiatrists decide that you are not able to understand the oath.” [Ch. II, p.29]


Also, I like the idea of co-ed showers, especially with Dizzy....

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 29, 2013 11:44 AM (kdS6q)

407 Hollowpoint - why do we need E-veryify if we already require employers to fill out an I-9?

Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 11:45 AM (gmeXX)

408 *chin on hands* Please, by all means, explain to me
how it is that I am the terrible evil awful no good mean person because
I believe that those who break the law should face the consequences of
their actions. Do go on.



Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Team Stompy. at January 29, 2013 11:42 AM (VtjlW)

Devil's Advocate: The law has never been seriously enforced, and is accepted by a majority of society as a necessary evil. People by and large view it as speeding on a freeway.
I think it's more serious than speeding on the freeway, but that's the way a majority of Americans(even R's!) think about it.

Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at January 29, 2013 11:45 AM (xAtAj)

409 why should convicted felons lose their 2nd Amendment rights? The founding fathers said THE PEOPLE not the good people, or the people who were bad but didn't get caught. Should the kids of felons lose their right to be protected in their homes by a felonious father ? Felons need FULL CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS

Posted by: occam at January 29, 2013 11:45 AM (RzFE8)

410 Universal suffrage is the worst idea in all of history. Well, maybe second behind that musical TV cop show they tried some years back.

Posted by: somebody else, not me at January 29, 2013 11:45 AM (nZvGM)

411 SPECIAL RESIDENT RETIREE VISA (SRRV). This is a good option if you are not married to a Philippine citizen, have a pension of more than $800 per month and have $10,000 to leave invested in a Philippine bank. It’s sort of the Cadillac (BMW?) of Philippine visas. You’ll never have to set foot in a Bureau of Immigration office. You’ll apply and get your visa at the relatively plush PRA offices in the Citibank Tower in Makati. SRRV holders are exempt from ACR, I-card, exit clearance and re-entry permit requirements. You get a special photo ID card and a pretty PRA visa with tropical island motif is inserted into your passport. As of 2009, the PRA had 21,000 foreign retirees from 17 countries.

Posted by: Cicero Kid at January 29, 2013 11:45 AM (m0v2L)

412 >>>I didn't serve in the military. I pay taxes.

Right. But. If you knew that voting was contingent upon service would you have done a nominal enlistment to secure your Citizenship?

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 11:46 AM (0q2P7)

413 We beat this back against enormous odds in 2006 and 2007. Can we do it again? If we do, I hope Rubio's career is the chief casualty. I'm already tired of listening to this con man.

Posted by: rrpjr at January 29, 2013 11:46 AM (hLkX8)

414 Notice how these proponents never have immigrant (illegal or not) competition for their own jobs. Let's import some of those Taiwanese bitch-slap congress ladies. I'd pay good money to see some brawls on the hill.

Posted by: DaveA at January 29, 2013 11:46 AM (tAie3)

415 Mommy why does that Nanny have a English accent?

Posted by: little girl watching Mary Poppins at January 29, 2013 11:46 AM (m2CN7)

416 Allow them to serve out their term doing (uncomfortable, difficult, and often boring) make-work if necessary.



Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 11:41 AM (8y9MW)


Then what's the point? If you're just making up shit for them to do, what's the point of having them do it? I'm assuming that there's supposed to be a benefit to the state. And again, not only are you creating a class/caste system, you're puting the govt in charge of it. What happens when people are found unfit after (for example) they serve 3 years of their 4 year term? Cause I'm sure nothing like that would ever happen. You give the govt control of who gets what rights and I'm sure there will be no abuse.

Posted by: BCochran1981 at January 29, 2013 11:46 AM (da5Wo)

417 Any amnesty for law-abiding gun-owners in there? Didn't think so.

Posted by: t-bird at January 29, 2013 11:46 AM (FcR7P)

418 Enforcing existing law means getting those who are here illegally out of
the country. Yes, this is what many are fixated on. If you personally
aren't in favor of moving the illegals back to their home country, but
also are not in favor of letting them stay here legally, then I would
love to hear what you think should be done.


You seem to think that deporting individual aliens is the same as mass deportation.

I have absolutely no problem with, as illegals are brought in for whatever reason (often: driving without a license, or driving without insurance), then deporting them. I agree that doing mass round-ups and deportations would be logistically problematic. I could give to rips about it being "politically" problematic.

So, yes: enforce the laws on the books. ICE has limited resources and would have to deploy them responsibly- which would mean no mass deportations anyway. But, yes, individuals should be deported as they break some other law (thus bringing them to our attention).

If that causes many of them not to "pay" taxes (they never pay net taxes though, somehow they always end up making just enough money to qualify for some sweet, sweet benies), I'm fine with that.

What you are claiming is that people like me want to do mass round-ups, and that simply isn't on the table.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 11:46 AM (8y9MW)

419 I thought Rubio was gonna be the new GOP hotness


what happened

(low information moron)

Posted by: Jones in CO at January 29, 2013 11:46 AM (8sCoq)

420 Why does Reagan get a pass on IRCA and EMTALA while a conservative like Jeff Flake is labelled a RINO for his position on this issue? You cannot have it both ways.
Posted by: 80sBaby at January 29, 2013 11:43 AM (YjDyJ)

He doesn't. He fucked up.

I was thinking of the broader view; the Conservative Rebellion.

It failed.

Posted by: eman at January 29, 2013 11:47 AM (jp2Ur)

421 Marco, Ace called. You can have your garbage back.

Posted by: t-bird at January 29, 2013 11:47 AM (FcR7P)

422 A key figure in Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi’s government called the Holocaust a hoax cooked up by U.S. intelligence operatives and claimed the 6 million Jews who were killed by Nazis simply moved to the U.S.

The outrageous claims, by Fathi Shihab-Eddim, a senior figure close to President Morsi who is now responsible for appointing the editors of all state-run Egyptian newspapers, came as the world marked Holocaust Remembrance Day on Jan. 27, and also as the U.S. continues to assess its relationship with the increasingly radical Arab state.

“The myth of the Holocaust is an industry that America invented,” Shihab-Eddim said, leaving no room for doubt that the Egyptian government — like Iran’s — has at the very least significant elements that deny humanity’s greatest crime of all.

“U.S. intelligence agencies in cooperation with their counterparts in allied nations during World War II created it [the Holocaust] to destroy the image of their opponents in Germany, and to justify war and massive destruction against military and civilian facilities of the Axis powers, and especially to hit Hiroshima and Nagasaki with the atomic bomb,” Shihab-Eddim said.

Hey I got an idea let's give em some more F-16s and tanks and say what nice guys they are. Real sweethearts. And obama actually likes taking credit for this?????

Posted by: Nevergiveup at January 29, 2013 11:47 AM (9Bj8R)

423 409 Occtard,

Hey it's our first five alarm fuckhead of the day....

welcome Occtard....

Hey Occtard why should narcotraficantes and MS-13 get amnesty?

Oh that's right because Amigo!

MS-13 has killed more folks than I have, but I'm a better shot.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:47 AM (LRFds)

424
Along with #408,

When the majority of a population refuses to obey the law, there is no law.

That is the situation with illegal immigration today, most notably on the border.

It's done. It's over.

Posted by: Who Knows at January 29, 2013 11:47 AM (W+Itt)

425 This thread is now repeating arguments. Time for fresh blood.

Posted by: Vic at January 29, 2013 11:48 AM (53z96)

426 There are plenty of places where only those who serve can participate in government. They're called military dictatorships. Not sure they turn out too well in general.

Posted by: BSR: Live from Falls Church at January 29, 2013 11:48 AM (CBCxo)

427
My only point is that these King-for-a-day fantasies are a waste of mental energy.
Posted by: BSR:



And you are choosing to ignore an example of it being done before in the US, not to mention in other areas such as the Indian Partition, the break-up of Yugoslavia and so on.

Just hand-waving and declaring "it canna be done captain"....

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 29, 2013 11:48 AM (kdS6q)

428 Besides, York says it is going nowhere.

Posted by: Vic at January 29, 2013 11:48 AM (53z96)

429 >>>Posted by: occam

Yawn.....
You know Beck addressed that on at least 3 shows in the past week. Maybe you should bother to listen. Oh that's right your a moonbat troll. No matter what I say you'll ignore it because you aren't here to have a good faith discussion that challenges your point of view. You're here to be an asshole.

Fuckoff.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 11:48 AM (0q2P7)

430
Right. But. If you knew that voting was contingent upon service would you have done a nominal enlistment to secure your Citizenship?


My service is paying taxes. I owe the government nothing more than that to get a say in its decisions.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 29, 2013 11:48 AM (hjRtO)

431 411 SPECIAL RESIDENT RETIREE VISA (SRRV)

You know. There just might be a god, after all...

Posted by: akula51 at January 29, 2013 11:48 AM (YesJa)

432 A Rule of Law person would be confronted by the facts that:

1) The status quo is awful, ROL-wise. It's better to enforce the laws, or get them off the books.

2) Americans by and large are against enforcing the immigration laws 100% as they are.

We have to fix this one way or the other. We have to start thinking about how to handle the demographics changes, which are rolling in as the illegal immigrants have anchor babies with full voting rights.

It's coming like it or not.

Sucks, sure. But the game is rigged, no sense in denying it.

Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at January 29, 2013 11:49 AM (xAtAj)

433 Lets take the long-term view of history. The left purports to be the vanguard of "science" and "scientific applications" because they're for "smarter" solutions.

We're only on earth for a fleeting moment, but "what we do in life echoes"...well, for a long time. Are we going to be a Type II civilization, that at some point in our future we'll get to the stars. But it's not inevitable--we can just as easily revert to the middle ages, with centuries of lost potential.

With the implementation of the welfare state, we're basically resigned to national subsistence for the indefinite future. Instead of being inspired to do great things a la the 50s and early 60s, we're trapped in an endless cycle of ineptitude. We can point to the many commercial applications brought about by NASA--what a tragedy of the times that our vast human potential will be thwarted because our economic future is hopeless.

Is there another Ramunajan among the immigrants from Mexico? Is there untapped potential to reverse our decline? Or will the aggregate effects hasten our decline?

Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at January 29, 2013 11:49 AM (Ec6wH)

434 Fences will not work.period.end

Fences and wall are like
locks. They are devices to keep honest people out unless monitored by
someone providing security. Then they act as a time delay to allow
security to respond. The better the fence, the few people assets you
need.


Who is easier to detect and catch- someone scaling a wall, or someone sneaking through scrub brush at night?

Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 29, 2013 11:49 AM (SY2Kh)

435 As a citizen of Phoenix, AZ I demand that a cost analysis be done of what can be expected in additional costs to my state to enact ANY of these plans being considered. I don't just mean in welfare and healthcare costs (which is still tough to do by itself) - I'm talking about depressed wages, law enforcement, education costs, etc.

Proponents of any bill involving "comprehensive immigration reform" need to consider ALL of the unintended consequences of what they are promoting. McRino sure is hell can't/won't do the heavy lifting on that request so it obviously would have to be outsourced...

BTW I live in a fairly affluent part of North Phoenix (200k houses) but I can drive less than 3 miles in any direction and be in neighborhoods that look like you've stepped right into Hermosillo - all of the signage and billboards are even in Spanish.

From street level: When SB1070 passed we saw a very large percentage of self-deportations in these same areas - this translated, in just one metric as an example, to school class sizes being measurably smaller (thus providing a better education for all of the remaining children).

Naturally the teachers union hates this (although they've constantly bitched about large class sizes). They have to justify their existence and usefulness somehow and declining enrollment scares them shitless (even if it's non-english students that require a hell of a lot more resources).

I've thought this through more comprehensively than the turds on the Hill and I'm only scratching the surface with my analysis. Once you flood our neighborhoods with "legalized", low education, low skilled workers all of their original places get taken by the next wave of illegal immigrants who were simply late to the party. Instant never ending barrio.

There is a very good reason why AZ fights all of this shit tooth and nail, and it isn't racial, trust me. If our neighborhoods were flooded with white trash living in the same fashion (I'm looking at you East Mesa) we would be just as concerned.

Posted by: Red State Ricky at January 29, 2013 11:49 AM (SbUMe)

436 About the only thing illegals can't do is vote.
Posted by: Andrew at January 29, 2013 11:40 AM (HS3dy)

lol

Posted by: Heralder at January 29, 2013 11:50 AM (+xmn4)

437 Marco, Ace called. You can have your garbage back.

Thread winner.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at January 29, 2013 11:50 AM (ZKzrr)

438 Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 11:46 AM (0q2P7)

That's basically conscription. And as a point I think it would make the military weaker.
Trust me, the military doesn't want me. I'm not worth anything to it.

It may have worked in Starship troopers, I don't think it would work here.
(Although I suppose if you went this route you convert a lot of the DoD civilian jobs to "military" jobs, which mike make it somewhat less bad for the military overall.)

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 29, 2013 11:50 AM (oG3dE)

439 431 Akula 51,

They also have a pretty good 1911 factory.

Lots of room for capital investment.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:50 AM (LRFds)

440 Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 11:42 AM (0q2P7)



I believe in God-given, or Natural if you prefer, rights. I believe that one of those rights is liberty. Another is the ability to determine (in at least a small way) how I choose to use that liberty. If you deny the right to vote, you've denied my ability to speak and determine how I am governed. I don't support that.

Posted by: BCochran1981 at January 29, 2013 11:51 AM (da5Wo)

441 We have de facto amnesty right now

Ah, yes, the Hillary Gambit: "What difference, at this point, does it make?"

Posted by: t-bird at January 29, 2013 11:51 AM (FcR7P)

442 >About the only thing illegals can't do is vote.
Posted by: Andrew at January 29, 2013 11:40 AM (HS3dy)


yeah keep on believing that as the Right gets buried electorally

Posted by: Jones in CO at January 29, 2013 11:52 AM (8sCoq)

443 "We have de facto amnesty right now
No we don’t.
If we did, why are we going through this whole process in the first place?"



thank you

Posted by: Shoey at January 29, 2013 11:52 AM (Y7jCH)

444 432 HoboJerky,

then it is better to burn the thing down and start over.....

not kidding.

Fuck the left.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 11:52 AM (LRFds)

445 You could easily use the IRS to fight illegal immigration with the tax code, if both big and small businesses started getting audited for who they were hiring it would be solved overnight.

Again, there's the Left that wants to swell their voter rolls and just enough on the Right that are "Chamber Commerce" conservatives that want cheap labor so they can get a bigger McMansion and Escalade. And you combine that with delusional Republicans like the Bush family that have this idiotic idea that once we get Amnesty, the hispanics will suddenly become to the GOP what blacks are to the Democrat Party, nevermind immigration is not an issue in Central and South America yet most of the countries are left wing shit holes.

Posted by: McAdams at January 29, 2013 11:52 AM (J/+6n)

446 Fences don't work???? Gee Israel would beg to disagree

Posted by: Nevergiveup at January 29, 2013 11:52 AM (9Bj8R)

447 Devil's Advocate: The law has never been seriously enforced, and is accepted by a majority of society as a necessary evil. People by and large view it as speeding on a freeway.
I think it's more serious than speeding on the freeway, but that's the way a majority of Americans(even R's!) think about it.
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at January 29, 2013 11:45 AM (xAtAj)



Hmmm, I suppose I will give credence to that as being responsive though I do find it wholly unpersuasive.


I should clarify my own point, I agree with Allen's approach of deportation as people are brought to the attention of law enforcement as opposed to mass roundups.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Team Stompy. at January 29, 2013 11:53 AM (VtjlW)

448 >>>There are plenty of places where only those who serve can participate in
government. They're called military dictatorships. Not sure they turn
out too well in general.

Service as a prerequisite for Citizenship is not a new idea. The Swiss, the only nation in Europe that trusts their Citizenry to have guns use conscription.

Military dictatorships revolve around those in current service as officers run the show.

Comparing that to any successfully completed term of service grants rights to vote and otherwise participate in government is disingenuous or ignorant.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 11:53 AM (0q2P7)

449 Then what's the point? If you're just making up shit for them to do,
what's the point of having them do it? I'm assuming that there's
supposed to be a benefit to the state.


Have you read Starship Troopers? Because it explains it in there.

Quickly, however: the theory (to give it so lofty a term) is that someone who has had to earn the Franchise will care for it more than someone to whom it is merely "given." The benefit to the state is that only people who value their citizenship enough to stick out their assignments will then earn the privilege of the vote.. That "uncomfortable, difficult, and often boring" is important.

Since the people who vote had to earn it- by "uncomfortable, difficult, and often boring" (when it isn't down right dangerous/deadly) means, they are more likely (and even Heinlein admits this is far from a guarantee) to place the needs of society- including individual liberty and the benefits to society that come with it- over their own desires.

Like I said, I'm okay with that approach. I'm also okay with having to pay (net) taxes to get to vote. Whatever we do, a "universal" franchise is a silly, even childish idea.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 11:53 AM (8y9MW)

450 365 ejo

"The Catholic Church is left wing, particularly in South America."

Very true, plus American Catholics would not recognize their religious beliefs. Hispanic Catholicism is 33% Christianity and 67% folk religion. The idea that all Catholics everywhere believe the same thing is baloney.

One encouraging sign I see is that Hispanics in Texas are increasingly turning toward charismatic evangelical churches. These churches are springing all over the place in the northern suburbs of Dallas. That's another story the mainstream media isn't reporting.

And, no, sven10077 — I'm not endorsing amnesty. I'm just reporting facts from the trenches.

Posted by: Michael the Hobbit at January 29, 2013 11:53 AM (hzV1U)

451 >>>*chin on hands* Please, by all means, explain to me how it is that I am the terrible evil awful no good mean person because I believe that those who break the law should face the consequences of their actions. Do go on

I am amazed that people don't get this. The issue is not that you are a jerk for thinking that is the best solution. It would be a very neat and tidy solution, if it were doable.

The issue is that actually accomplishing mass deportation is, politically speaking, a masturbatory pipe dream. We need to focus on locking down the borders FOR REAL and generally forget about those who got past the law. That ship has sailed, and we lost that battle years ago when they came in illegally.

Posted by: dan-O at January 29, 2013 11:53 AM (kuRCh)

452 Who is easier to detect and catch- someone scaling a wall, or someone sneaking through scrub brush at night?


Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 29, 2013 11:49 AM (SY2Kh)


I forget, why can't me mine the boarder again? Listen people would say "it's so cruel!" but choices have consequences, and choosing to cross a minefield means you have to deal with the consequences of dying.(I said something similar when I read an article that was whining about how hard crossing the boarder was, and as we locked down easier crossing people had to resort to harder ones. No one is forcing you to take the crazy, stupid, likely to kill you risk.)

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 29, 2013 11:53 AM (oG3dE)

453 Looks like Barry in his amnesty speech today will say that he absolutely will not agree to the border enforcement part of this as yet seen bill. Why should he? If it passed he would just EO the hell out of it. Courts? What Court? See NLRB ruling being ignored....

Posted by: Hello, it's me Donna let it burn really.really bummed at January 29, 2013 11:53 AM (9+ccr)

454 427:

Again, I'm not arguing that the government couldn't figure out a way to mass deport. I'm arguing that its politically impossible without either:

A: Conservative in the white house + 60 Votes in the senate

OR

B: Veto proof majorities in both houses.

And thats assuming every republican holds the line and no court finds a way to stop it.

Thats why is a masturbatory fantasy. It cannot happen unless there is a massive change in attitudes unlike any ever before seen.

Posted by: BSR: Live from Falls Church at January 29, 2013 11:53 AM (CBCxo)

455 Fences don't work???? Gee Israel would beg to disagree

I love me some Iron Dome.

Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at January 29, 2013 11:53 AM (ZKzrr)

456
About the only thing illegals can't do is vote.
Posted by: Andrew




Oh, you are a-dorable!

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 29, 2013 11:54 AM (kdS6q)

457 It's not amnesty amnesty.

Posted by: Whoopie Gonzales at January 29, 2013 11:55 AM (QM5S2)

458 Hollowpoint - why do we need E-veryify if we already require employers to fill out an I-9?

Two reasons:

1. It isn't working.
2. Filling out an I-9 and sticking it in their filing cabinet for three years does nothing to reliably identify illegals.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 29, 2013 11:55 AM (SY2Kh)

459 >>>I believe in God-given, or Natural if you prefer, rights. I believe that
one of those rights is liberty. Another is the ability to determine (in
at least a small way) how I choose to use that liberty. If you deny the
right to vote, you've denied my ability to speak and determine how I am
governed. I don't support that.

Then serve and get your right to vote. If it's too much of a bother than being able to vote is too much of a bother.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 11:55 AM (0q2P7)

460 445You could easily use the IRS to fight illegal immigration with the tax code, if both big and small businesses started getting audited for who they were hiring it would be solved overnight.Posted by: McAdams at January 29, 2013 11:52 AM (J/+6n)

I think the tax code is weaponized enough already. It's a decent idea, I just don't like handing the IRS more bullets.

Posted by: Heralder at January 29, 2013 11:56 AM (+xmn4)

461 446 Fences don't work???? Gee Israel would beg to disagree
_________
So do we.

Posted by: 7th c. BC Chinese at January 29, 2013 11:56 AM (NWLVJ)

462 And no, a committee voting to deem the border secure does not make it so.

----I though Napolitano already declared it more secure than ever. I see no need for another committee/commission.


Posted by: RioBravo at January 29, 2013 11:57 AM (eEfYn)

463 I am amazed that people don't get this. The issue is not that you are a jerk for thinking that is the best solution. It would be a very neat and tidy solution, if it were doable.

The issue is that actually accomplishing mass deportation is, politically speaking, a masturbatory pipe dream.



Yeah. It's amazing how I don't get that I'm not being called a jerk when the same person turns around and refers to a masturbatory pipe dream. Yup, complete and utter mystery why I would presume that anyone who makes such statements is calling into question my intelligence and decency. Utter. Mystery.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Team Stompy. at January 29, 2013 11:57 AM (VtjlW)

464 Shitty Mongols!

Posted by: tong lu kim at January 29, 2013 11:58 AM (ORGYc)

465 From the side bar...

"EV options have 180% to 290% greater HTP impacts compared to the ICEV..."


WTF?! Cut that shit out. Fucking irritating as hell. Type the fucking words. The abbreviations don't make you look smarter than me.

Posted by: Dang at January 29, 2013 11:58 AM (R18D0)

466 Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 11:53 AM (8y9MW)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the constitution disagree with you on this point? So either start proposing amendments, or face it, not gonna happen.

In any case, there are also alternate theories as to why people disrespect the franchise. "Democracy Surplus" is currently my running favorite. I think it makes more sense than "you didn't work for it."

Arguably I didn't work for my franchise either (I pay taxes, but that's about it.) Yet I still put more thought into my vote than several of my friends in the military who vote surprisingly left "for the children" or some such.
And certainly more so than Warren Buffet (who pays a large tax bill.)

Conditioning the franchise on something else won't solve our problems, I doubt it'd even put a dent in them. It's a flawed theory with 0 evidence.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 29, 2013 11:58 AM (oG3dE)

467
461446 Fences don't work???? Gee Israel would beg to disagree

No one gets in, no one gets out!

Posted by: DMZ at January 29, 2013 11:58 AM (m0v2L)

468 Since the people who vote had to earn it- by
"uncomfortable, difficult, and often boring" (when it isn't down right
dangerous/deadly) means, they are more likely (and even Heinlein admits
this is far from a guarantee) to place the needs of society- including
individual liberty and the benefits to society that come with it- over
their own desires.



Hhahahahahahahahahahaha. So shuffling papers for 4 years suddenly makes people liberty lovers?



Like I said, I'm okay with that approach. I'm
also okay with having to pay (net) taxes to get to vote. Whatever we do,
a "universal" franchise is a silly, even childish idea.


Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 11:53 AM (8y9MW)


I reject, utterly and completely, any idea that puts the govt in control of whether or not I have a say in how I am governed. Govt is (supposed to be) at the behest of the people. I don't have to jump through hoops for it. It serves me. I don't serve it.

Posted by: BCochran1981 at January 29, 2013 11:59 AM (da5Wo)

469 The Aussies and Canadians smartened up about this let everyone in immigration shit when they saw their FSA expenditures ballooning uncontrollably.

Posted by: @PurpAv at January 29, 2013 12:00 PM (GlnE7)

470 A thumbnail sketch of a history lesson that could never be repeated:
Burgeoning numbers of Mexican migrants prompted President Eisenhower to appoint General Joseph Swing as INS Commissioner. According to AttorneyGeneral Herbert Brownell, Jr. Eisenhower had a sense of urgency about illegal immigration upon taking office. In a letter to Senator J. William Fulbright, Eisenhower quoted a report in The New York Times that said, "The rise in illegal border-crossing by Mexican 'wetbacks' to a current rate of more than 1,000,000 cases a year has been accompanied by a curious relaxation in ethical standards extending all the way from the farmer-exploiters of this contraband labor to the highest levels of the Federal Government."
The effort began in California and Arizona in 1954 and coordinated 1,075 Border Patrol agents, along with state and local police agencies. Tactics employed included going house to house in Mexican-American neighborhoods and citizenship checks during standard traffic stops.
Some 750 agents targeted agricultural areas with a goal of 1,000 apprehensions per day. By the end of July, over 50,000 illegal aliens were caught in the two states. An estimated 488,000 illegal aliens are believed to have left voluntarily, for fear of being apprehended. By September, 80,000 had been taken into custody in Texas, and the INS estimated that 500,000 to 700,000 had left Texas of their own accord. To discourage illicit re-entry, buses and trains took many deportees deep within Mexican territory before releasing them.
Tens of thousands more were deported by two chartered ships: the Emancipation and the Mercurio. The ships ferried them from Port Isabel, Texas, to Veracruz, Mexico, more than 500 miles (800km) to the south. Some were taken as far as 1,000 miles (1,600km). Deportation by sea was ended after seven deportees jumped overboard from the Mercurio and drowned, provoking a mutiny that led to a public outcry in Mexico.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 12:00 PM (wbmaj)

471 AZ had it right with SB1070, they just never got a chance to lock and load the second part of the legislation. Just like you require an I-9 to work here the same thing needs to be applied to renting or purchasing homes/apts. - with hefty fines or property liens for those landlords/realtors that don't abide by the law. Take the ability to work and reside here away and the problem magically disappears.

Posted by: Red State Ricky at January 29, 2013 12:00 PM (SbUMe)

472
People need to start at the beginning.

Why does anyone want to keep immigrants out of the U.S.?

If changes can be made to address those concerns, would you still oppose letting anyone who wanted to immigrate do so?

Posted by: jwest at January 29, 2013 12:00 PM (ZDsRL)

473 I cant wait to have this argument again sometime around December 2015

Posted by: BSR: Live from Falls Church at January 29, 2013 12:00 PM (CBCxo)

474


Dammit

Posted by: BCochran1981 at January 29, 2013 12:00 PM (da5Wo)

475 454 BSR,

Understand something....if the Mexicans bring that LA race war crap to Indiana or Ohio they're going home in body bags.

"Senor we are reconquisitng our sacred homeland of Oyo." means fuckall to me.....

if the Shawnee or the Miami come ask it is a little different.

They are not coming to play nice amigo they are coming to take and are here by their culture's rules as felons already....

this same government that wants to flood me out wants my guns?

Lo siento not happening.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 12:00 PM (LRFds)

476 Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 11:53 AM

If we're still looking at the SST model, it goes even further- no one, while still enlisted is a citizen. Citizenship (and therefore the vote) is only granted on satisfactory completion of service. As he points out, that means there are old men who have served for decades (in the book) who couldn't vote, while other young men, who served only a single term could.

Of course, the other thing about this little fantasy scenario: the Federation in SST only arose after a third world war, and a complete societal collapse which occurred immediately after.

By the time Juan Rico was recounting his story, society had settled in such that no one living remembered America as it had existed.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 12:01 PM (8y9MW)

477 Since the legislation is intended to solve the current illegal immigration problem for those deemed worthy of its benefits, will the legislation also make it a federal crime for city, state and localofficials to interfere with future efforts to enforce immigration laws against future illegal immigrants. How about making it a felony for any state, city or local official to make their city a sanctuary city or to provide licenses or benefits to illegal aliens or require police to enforce immigration laws by reporting illegals to ICE.
I'm old enough to remember when Reagan signed the last immigration bill that would solve these hardship cases and prevent future immigration problems. That was 11 milllion illegals ago. If there is a serious intent to fix the problem, make it a felony for government officials to not enforce the law, or better yet create a private right of action allowing individuals to sue those officials. The plaintiff's bar would love that.

Posted by: rbattman at January 29, 2013 12:01 PM (tLk+e)

478 Hey just for informational purposes, every new outlet on the planet is reporting that, that drug doc down in Miami has A-Rod still on performance enhancing drugs right thru 2012. I hope the Yanks try to void that phony fucks contract

Posted by: Nevergiveup at January 29, 2013 12:01 PM (9Bj8R)

479
why do we need E-verify if we already require employers to fill out an I-9?




Employers are held responsible for verifying, to a reasonable extent, the information on the I-9. If Homeland Security does an audit and an employee comes up with bum info, both the employee and employer get hit.

E-Verify is just a tool to allow employers to more easily check that information upfront.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 29, 2013 12:02 PM (kdS6q)

480 >>> What you are claiming is that people like me want to do mass round-ups, and that simply isn't on the table

My God, what on earth are you talking about? Deportation of all illegal immigrants is precisely what you are talking about, or else you don't know what you are talking about. But it is definitely "on the table", so stop being cute. The 11 million (or whatever number) illegal aliens broke the law when they entered the country, and they break the law again when they get jobs, drive a car, or do anything else that is regulated by government. Enforcing the law on books means deporting them for such violations.

Posted by: dan-O at January 29, 2013 12:02 PM (kuRCh)

481 I cant wait to have this argument again sometime around December 2015
¿qué?

Posted by: josé shit head at January 29, 2013 12:02 PM (ORGYc)

482 If the United States ever actually bothered enforcing immigration laws, both at the border and internally, there wouldn't be any need for mass deportations --- we'd see vast numbers of illegals voluntarily returning to their home countries year after year until there weren't many left. The pro-amnesty crowd likes to pretend the only alternative is between amnesty and forced deportation, because excluding reasonable alternatives drives people into the amnesty camp.

Posted by: DKCZ at January 29, 2013 12:03 PM (9/bcB)

483 472
People need to start at the beginning.

Why does anyone want to keep immigrants out of the U.S.?


Posted by: jwest at January 29, 2013 12:00 PM (ZDsRL)

You need to start by asking the right question. It's not about immigrants or immigration, it is about tens of millions of illegal inhabitants.

Posted by: Heralder at January 29, 2013 12:03 PM (+xmn4)

484 >Why does anyone want to keep immigrants out of the U.S.?


In the past, people came here to be Americans. Now they come here to continue being muslims or Mexicans or Somalis or what have you at our expense

enough

Posted by: Jones in CO at January 29, 2013 12:03 PM (8sCoq)

485 475: I dont believe Ohio is part of their phony "stolen territory" so you're probably okay on that front.

Posted by: BSR: Live from Falls Church at January 29, 2013 12:03 PM (CBCxo)

486 481 Jose Shit Head,

si jose it's cut the gringo thinks we will ever have this argument again.....

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 12:04 PM (LRFds)

487 Type the fucking words. The abbreviations don't make you look smarter than me.

That's a cut/paste quote from the study.

I thought link's text " EV car production more toxic to humans environment than ICE" made the context clear. EV=electric vehicle, ICE=internal combustion engine.

Sidebar screen real estate is precious.

Posted by: @PurpAv at January 29, 2013 12:04 PM (GlnE7)

488



Obama Admin Praises Morsi While Defending Decision To Gift Muslim Brotherhood Regime F-16s…

State Department letter to GOP Sen. Jim Inhofe:

Weasel Zippers. It's a dandy letter and shows just how delusional obama and liberals are


Posted by: Nevergiveup at January 29, 2013 12:04 PM (9Bj8R)

489 As far as fences working, is seem to recall a sergeant screaming that obstacles need to be covered by observation and fire.

Posted by: Jean at January 29, 2013 12:04 PM (z6Elp)

490 481: Just a snarky prediction that this will be a main issue during the 2016 primaries...

Posted by: BSR: Live from Falls Church at January 29, 2013 12:05 PM (CBCxo)

491 I think the tax code is weaponized enough already. It's a decent idea, I just don't like handing the IRS more bullets.

Posted by: Heralder

I agree the IRS is too omnipotent, but that train left the station a long time ago. Might as well get some benefit out of it.

But if you got the IRS involved, jobs for illegal aliens would just the menial stuff like it used to be : hard manual labor for cash under the table. Then it's a controllable problem.

Posted by: McAdams at January 29, 2013 12:05 PM (J/+6n)

492 Then serve and get your right to vote. If it's too much of a bother than being able to vote is too much of a bother.


Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 11:55 AM (0q2P7)


You do not get to decide what rights I have. The govt does not get to decide what rights I have. This country was based upon the idea of Natural Rights. Those rights are inherent. They cannot/should not be awarded or taken away by man/govt.

Posted by: BCochran1981 at January 29, 2013 12:05 PM (da5Wo)

493 In any case, there are also alternate theories as to why people disrespect the franchise.

Mine is 'Values Decay', where folks care more about Kardashians, Idol, and iStuff than the things that keep civilization going...and only vote when someone tells them their Stuff depends on it.

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Meadow Party 2016 at January 29, 2013 12:05 PM (GBXon)

494 473 I cant wait to have this argument again sometime around December 2015
_________
Perfect timing to give the GOP primary debate moderators plenty of ammunition for "why do rethuglikkkans hate people-of-color" questions.

Let's throw in Puerto Rican statehood at about the same time too, just for the fun of it.

Posted by: Dante at January 29, 2013 12:05 PM (NWLVJ)

495 Proponents of any bill involving "comprehensive
immigration reform" need to consider ALL of the unintended consequences
of what they are promoting. McRino sure is hell can't/won't do the heavy
lifting on that request so it obviously would have to be outsourced...



Posted by: Red State Ricky at January 29, 2013 11:49 AM

"Unintended Consequences" is not a term that politicians, hacks, and other elitists are familiar with.

Unless it causes them to lose re-election or a lot of money

Posted by: kbdabear at January 29, 2013 12:05 PM (wwsoB)

496 Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the constitution disagree with you
on this point? So either start proposing amendments, or face it, not
gonna happen.


Actually, it does no such thing. "Voting age" is governed by statute, not amendment. We could change the voting age to 21 tomorrow, and there is no Constitutional argument against it.

Also, we're talking completely theoretically, here. If you want me to propose my ideal society (never a good idea), I'll need more space.

Posted by: BCochran1981 at January 29, 2013 11:59 AM (da5Wo)
1st: Barrel.
2nd: You already are. Government sets the voting age. Government sets the rules that govern who can run (in effect if not in statute). Government decides when elections will be held.

The franchise is already limited by the (to my mind, absurd) distinction of age, as though turning 18 suddenly makes one capable of making sound decisions regarding the course of the country.

It's the worst possible solution, except for all the others that have been tried.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 12:06 PM (8y9MW)

497 As he points out, that means there are old men who
have served for decades (in the book) who couldn't vote, while other
young men, who served only a single term could.


Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 12:01 PM (8y9MW)

I think this alone points out the obvious contradiction in the entire idea.If we're suggesting that people will better appreciate their franchise after serving, wouldn't it then follow that people who continued to serve would appreciate it even more, yet in the SST model they can't vote.Disagree with the positive argument in Plato's Republic all you want, but the negative arguments against the various other forms of government are spot on, and Meritocracy is on that list.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 29, 2013 12:06 PM (oG3dE)

498 Dear Leader, who knows the value of propoganda, and how willingly the blind sheep will be led, is working feverishly to destroy the remaining voices of dissent. Continued mass illegal immigration assists in reaching this goal. ("They hate you because you are Hispanic"). Quite frightening.

Posted by: Fourth Virginia at January 29, 2013 12:07 PM (wbmaj)

499 >>>Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the constitution disagree with you
on this point? So either start proposing amendments, or face it, not
gonna happen.

Yes this is looking down the road and would require amendments. So what exactly? I'm looking down the barrel at a failed state right now, talking about how we "do it better next time" when the Constitution for the Texan States of America gets drafted is a good discussion. Hell the lefties are already zeroing in on the their Moonbat Constitution of Why-Do-We-Bother-To-Write-It-Down-Because-We'll-Just-Ignore-It-If-Inconvenient.

We need to look down the road at what went wrong. Why we weren't able to keep our freedom. Long term changes have to happen. Universal suffrage was a bad idea as far as I can see. I wait for someone to explain to me in theory how we can get the majority of the US to vote against their individual interests for the public good?

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 12:07 PM (0q2P7)

500 453 Looks like Barry in his amnesty speech today will say that he absolutely will not agree to the border enforcement part of this as yet seen bill. Why should he? If it passed he would just EO the hell out of it. Courts? What Court? See NLRB ruling being ignored....

The SCOAMT's position RE border enforcement is one of the reasons why passage of a bill based on the Gang of Eight's framework is unlikely.

Posted by: 80sBaby at January 29, 2013 12:07 PM (YjDyJ)

501 Posted by: McAdams
But if you got the IRS involved, jobs for illegal aliens would just the menial stuff like it used to be : hard manual labor for cash under the table. Then it's a controllable problem.

Ah, the good old days of "Seasonal Workers". I miss that...

Posted by: Red State Ricky at January 29, 2013 12:08 PM (SbUMe)

502 This country was based upon the idea of Natural Rights. Those rights are inherent.

Interestingly, the Founders don't seem to have seen the franchise as a 'right' in that way, though they'd agree with you on the basic principle. They seemed to consider it something to be extended to people they defined as responsible and capable of making rational choices, something we've abandoned over the generations since.

Tricky thing about 'rights' is how often they wind up being in the eyes of the beholder...

Posted by: Brother Cavil, Meadow Party 2016 at January 29, 2013 12:08 PM (GBXon)

503 Puerto Rican statehood isnt the gold mine Dems think it is. PRs stateside are very liberal but on the island itself it's more split. The Repubs have had the governorship for awhile I believe

Posted by: BSR: Live from Falls Church at January 29, 2013 12:08 PM (CBCxo)

504 E-Verify is just a tool to allow employers to more easily check that information upfront.
----

Maybe. But e-verify is an additional burden imposed by the federal government on hiring employees. We should resist imposting additional burdens, particularly when there is already a similar burden in place. Further, how soon will employers get an answer back. Who willl give them that answer. Do we want to spend more money to do this. Will it really solve the problem? My guess is no. Therefore, I don't think the added burdens make this agood idea.

Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 12:09 PM (gmeXX)

505 You may also know me as LiB.

Posted by: The Law of Unintended Consequences at January 29, 2013 12:09 PM (EZl54)

506 Build the fence and deport the illegal migrants.

Or surrender.

Posted by: eman at January 29, 2013 12:09 PM (jp2Ur)

507 >>> Yeah. It's amazing how I don't get that I'm not being called a jerk
when the same person turns around and refers to a masturbatory pipe
dream. Yup, complete and utter mystery why I would presume that anyone
who makes such statements is calling into question my intelligence and
decency. Utter. Mystery

Sorry, I didn't mean that as a personal attack. But it did come off rather snotty, sorry about that.

Posted by: dan-O at January 29, 2013 12:10 PM (kuRCh)

508
"In the past, people came here to be Americans. Now they come here to continue being muslims or Mexicans or Somalis or what have you at our expense"

So, any solution should include a provision that all immigrants need to learn english, all education, signage, documents etc. be in english, correct?

Posted by: jwest at January 29, 2013 12:10 PM (ZDsRL)

509 I wait for someone to explain to me in theory how
we can get the majority of the US to vote against their individual
interests for the public good?


Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 12:07 PM (0q2P7)


You can't and you won't. Human nature is self absorbed and self interested. Every country will face a point in which people's self interested decision making brings it to the point of destruction. And then you must start the process over again. Hence, "watering the tree."

Posted by: BCochran1981 at January 29, 2013 12:11 PM (da5Wo)

510 I think voting should be limited to federal taxpayers who are citizens with no criminal record who have photo ID

also I would do away with voting by mail or online, except for active duty military

Voting in open elections is one of our greatest and hard-won freedoms. The least one can do is get off one's ass and show up in person on the day.

Posted by: Jones in CO at January 29, 2013 12:11 PM (8sCoq)

511 Actually, it does no such thing. "Voting age" is governed by statute,
not amendment. We could change the voting age to 21 tomorrow, and there
is no Constitutional argument against it.


Don't twist my words.
Voting age is governed by statute, that is true. But the subset of people within the age group set by the statute is not.
The framers specifically decided against using Property ownership as a limiting factor for voting. All we're doing is talking about throwing it (or something else) back in.

Let's face it, spin it how you want, but requiring taxes or military service is a poll tax, plain and simple. And while it sounds good on it's face, it's riddled with problems and rife for people using it to control the government to their ends. (Which is what the fucking poll tax was designed to do in the first place, GASP!)

Heck why not just go head and make it so only people who own real estate can vote? Sure I wouldn't have been able to vote until this year, but it would totally stop the FSA from voting.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 29, 2013 12:11 PM (oG3dE)

512 503 BSR,

plus Islanders like the status quo they get a lot of perks and less burdens.

I may move to PR a matter of fact if I decide CONUS in a zoo and no other nation will have me...PR has their Latin mafia problems but it is mostly orderly.....

we're importing MS-13 and narcotrafficantes soon mi amigo.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 12:11 PM (LRFds)

513 So, any solution should include a provision that all
immigrants need to learn english, all education, signage, documents
etc. be in english, correct?


Posted by: jwest at January 29, 2013 12:10 PM

RAAAAAACCCCCISSSSSTTTT !!!

Posted by: CA Democrat Party at January 29, 2013 12:13 PM (wwsoB)

514 My God, what on earth are you talking about? Deportation of all illegal
immigrants is precisely what you are talking about, or else you don't
know what you are talking about. But it is definitely "on the table", so
stop being cute.


You keep conflating individual deportations (as when illegals are caught driving without a license) and mass deportation (as in when ICE agents start rounding up every illegal they can find, and put them on buses or airplanes back to their country of origin). The two are very different, and no one is suggesting the latter, while no one is denying that the former is necessary.

I don't know if you're not getting it because I'm not being clear, or if you're choosing not to get it.

I'm all for deporting an illegal alien who is found for some other violation. That's "enforcing current law." It's the same way we enforce the current speed limit laws, or current littering laws, or even current tax-fraud laws. We catch the ones we can as we find them, and then deal with them.

I do not support, until other things are handled (if then), simply descending on areas in a systematic manner, and checking every person's legal residency status, then deporting the ones we find who can't prove they're here legally.

Again, the two are very different, both qualitatively and quantitatively. They are different "types" of deportation, as well as different logistically.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 12:13 PM (8y9MW)

515 511 TSRBike,

really then why the rulings against poll tax?

Look there is a reason why Maine invokes when a person speaks at a townhall "I am a taxpayer."

and there is something to that....

Free Shit Army does not give two fucks about American greatness beyond free shit.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 12:14 PM (LRFds)

516 505
You may also know me as LiB.



Posted by: The Law of Unintended Consequences at January 29, 2013 12:09 PM

Pleased to meet you, hope you guess my name

Posted by: The Devil at January 29, 2013 12:15 PM (wwsoB)

517 This whole bill is nothing but a scam. Dear Leader has already said he's not going to sign it. Doesn't give Juan El Guapo enough. This is theater by the dems to stir up racial tension. Nothing else.

Even here on AoSHQ, many seem to forget who the preezy and the dems really are. Marxists don't want peace. They've got to keep agitatin' until the takeover is complete.

Posted by: Soona at January 29, 2013 12:15 PM (Kk3Lm)

518
Wouldn't it be hilarious if the JEF comes out tomorrow with his own idea of a bill that's even more monstrous and totally blows this up? Just think - that way he can continue to demogogue Republicans as being obstructionists to his (and only his, natch) means of doing things "for the children."

And the lefts have a fit when we compare him to fascists of the past. /shocking

Posted by: sans_sheriff at January 29, 2013 12:15 PM (OQHM+)

519 I wonder how many of those Amnesty recipients will be entitled to Obamacare.

I wonder how many Americans will die waiting in line, for life saving treatments behind the younger , healthier , "foreign residents".

Posted by: The Law of Unintended Consequences at January 29, 2013 12:16 PM (EZl54)

520 AllenG - then the solution is to get a new executive. One that will enforce the existing deportation law. I suspect many would support that. Inevitably, the question would come up well what do you do with teh 99% who will not violate something. I think the answer is to do nothing.

Posted by: SH at January 29, 2013 12:17 PM (gmeXX)

521 Posted by: dan-O at January 29, 2013 12:10 PM (kuRCh)

You keep avoiding the self deportation tools and actual enforcement of deportation of those that break the law. You also seem to think that its an all or nothing proposal. Deporting 50% would go a long way in getting the support needed for immigration reform that allows for a path to citizenship.

Posted by: polynikes at January 29, 2013 12:17 PM (m2CN7)

522 >>>>You do not get to decide what rights I have. The govt does not get to
decide what rights I have. This country was based upon the idea of
Natural Rights. Those rights are inherent. They cannot/should not be
awarded or taken away by man/govt.

Universal suffrage or the Kings living as common men is not a God Given right to humanity. It is a right of the sovereign. One that has to be earned under God's law of sovereignty. Which means struggle is on the table. Go conquer your own dirt if you want to be King. As governance is not simply defending your own interests but also determining the service or assault to the interest of others through force of law and military might; as such it is not encapsulated in your "right to be free" as a right to be free does not carry the right to subjugate others as a rider.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 12:17 PM (0q2P7)

523 co-ed showers

Not in the Received Text, therefor not canon. I don;t think that Heinlein would have approved of mixing females amongst the knuckle draggers and hairy apes.

Part of that abomination of a movie, which might have been an ok sci-fi shoot-em up on its own, if they hadn't stuck RAH's name on it.

Posted by: Fox2! at January 29, 2013 12:18 PM (1Qpmy)

524 A Lawyer, an Illegal Alien, a Pathological Liar, a Muslim, a Communist and a Black Guy walk into a BAR.

Bartender asks....

"What'll it be, Mr. President?"

Posted by: grease monkey at January 29, 2013 12:20 PM (VSWPU)

525
AllenG: if we started deporting every illegal who was pulled over for a traffic stop or for any other infraction or crime, that would mean deportation on a massive scale. But that would not be mass deportation? Please. Being coy is not the same as being smart.

Posted by: dan-O at January 29, 2013 12:21 PM (kuRCh)

526 Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 12:14 PM (LRFds)

You lost me, I was making the point that there is precedent for not requiring various other conditions to vote.

I agree about the FSA, but the route to fix it is not to totally fuck with the franchise to the point that it's not longer a franchise.

Listen it boils down to this: Either I have a right to participate in government that transcends government's power to grant (i.e. a natural right) or all rights are conferred by government and as such subject to manipulation by government. The latter of course means that the power in power can simply craft the rules needed to keep themselves in power. If government gets to decide who can and can't vote on anything other than age, we're in for a peck of trouble.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 29, 2013 12:21 PM (oG3dE)

527
No use arguing about this, its a done deal.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at January 29, 2013 12:21 PM (p/cQy)

528 The framers specifically decided against using Property ownership as a limiting factor for voting.

Yet they had no problem limiting it by race, or gender. Both of those things had to be removed by amendments.

I think you're conflating the privilege of the Franchise with a "right." Same goes for BC.

Understand that the Founders did not see voting as a "right." All people, regardless of race, creed, gender, voting status, or even citizenship could "petition the government for redress of grievances," or "peaceably assemble." All people, regardless of race, creed, gender, voting status, or even citizenship had the right to "keep and bear arms" (as far as the Federal Government was concerned, anyway).

They issued no such protections for voting. Those came later via constitutional amendment. You can certainly argue that they were appropriate; I wouldn't disagree. But to claim that the Government doesn't already set the rules for the franchise denies reality.

If voting is a "right" then we are limiting others "rights" by saying they can't vote because (for instance) they're felons. Or illegal aliens. Or legal aliens who haven't become citizens yet. Or whatever.

Rights are universal- which is why they are not granted by any Government. Privileges can be given, taken away, or regulated by the State.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 12:22 PM (8y9MW)

529 Posted by: The Law of Unintended Consequences
I wonder how many Americans will die waiting in line, for life saving treatments behind the younger , healthier , "foreign residents".

*DING DING DING* - give that poster a cigar.

This long wait behind people with Sonoran dust still in their hair already occurs in many of our ERs in AZ and Obamacare hasn't even taken effect yet...

Posted by: Red State Ricky at January 29, 2013 12:22 PM (SbUMe)

530 Maybe. But e-verify is an additional burden imposed by the federal government on hiring employees.

It wouldn't be much of a burden compared to all the forms they already must fill out and submit.

Employers are already required to check and record ID documents; filling out a web form or making a phone call wouldn't be prohibitively time consuming or expensive.

Again- ever bought a gun from a dealer? If they can perform a federal background check in 5 minutes, so can an employer.

No, something like E-Verify wouldn't stop every housekeeper working for cash under the table, but it would help.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 29, 2013 12:22 PM (SY2Kh)

531 Heck why not just go head and make it so only people who own real estate can vote? Sure I wouldn't have been able to vote until this year, but it would totally stop the FSA from voting.
Posted by: tsrblke (work) at January 29, 2013 12:11 PM (oG3dE)

Yeah you may not have been able to vote but the people who would have would have been aware of the consequences of their vote by virtue of that specific qualificationand the outcome I would expect would have been one you would have agreed with until such time as to when you could qualify.

Qualifications to vote are already present. Expanding those qualifications is the issue.

Posted by: polynikes at January 29, 2013 12:23 PM (m2CN7)

532
Actually, it does no such thing. "Voting age" is governed by statute, not amendment.



Dude?

Twenty-sixth Amendment

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 29, 2013 12:23 PM (kdS6q)

533 >>>And while it sounds good on it's face, it's riddled with problems and
rife for people using it to control the government to their ends.

So too can the exact words be spoken of universal suffrage.

The difference is that no credible theory has been promulgated that says universal suffrage is workable.

That's why I favor instead of using taxes use service. Devote your time if you want to vote. That is not a poll tax, if it can reasonably be completed by anybody who cares to do it, with the same effort regardless of social status.

Consider it a really long voter registration process.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 12:23 PM (0q2P7)

534 >>>You keep avoiding the self deportation tools and actual enforcement of
deportation of those that break the law. You also seem to think that its
an all or nothing proposal. Deporting 50% would go a long way in
getting the support needed for immigration reform that allows for a path
to citizenship

Yes, but in the meantime, more illegals keep coming in. We can get hung up on those who have already beat the system, or stop the epidemic from continuing to happen. After that, I am all for different means of encouraging/forcing some to leave the country. But getting rid of all illegals is a pipe dream.

Posted by: dan-O at January 29, 2013 12:24 PM (kuRCh)

535 I hereby revoke my consent to be governed

Posted by: Jones in CO at January 29, 2013 12:26 PM (8sCoq)

536 "But if you got the IRS involved, jobs for illegal aliens would just the menial stuff like it used to be : hard manual labor for cash under the table. Then it's a controllable problem. "

You're assuming that the IRS is a disinterested party which will faithfully execute the laws as written. That's never been true, and now they barely even pretend. No matter what the law says, their actual "enforcement priorities" are just one executive order away.

Posted by: GalosGann at January 29, 2013 12:27 PM (T3KlW)

537 But getting rid of all illegals is a pipe dream.
Posted by: dan-O at January 29, 2013 12:24 PM (kuRCh)

again with the 'all ' .

Posted by: polynikes at January 29, 2013 12:28 PM (m2CN7)

538 Inevitably, the question would come up well what do you do with teh 99%
who will not violate something. I think the answer is to do nothing.


Many (most?) of them would self deport when the free shit stops flowing. Most of the rest? Yeah, I agree with you. We enforce the law as much as we are reasonably able. At this point, there is no way we would be "reasonably able" to round-up and deport the rest, and it would be the height of irresponsibility to grant them any legal status.

AllenG: if we started deporting every illegal who was pulled over for a
traffic stop or for any other infraction or crime, that would mean
deportation on a massive scale. But that would not be mass deportation?
Please. Being coy is not the same as being smart.


So war is mass-murder? I said "qualitatively" different as well as quantitatively. Yes, we'd be deporting "on a massive scale," because that's what happens when you get around to finally enforcing a law you've been ignoring for decades.

But perhaps you take offense to the "war is mass-murder" comparison (though I do think it's valid). We send people to jail (or sentence them to lesser penalties) for drunken driving "on a massive scale," does that mean (besides the holiday road-blocks, which I believe violate the 4th Amendment) that we have "mass drunk driving enforcement?"


Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 12:28 PM (8y9MW)

539 Twenty-sixth Amendment

D*mn. I keep forgetting that one. Largely because it was passed in my parents' lifetime, and it just seems weird to me.

But, even so- the point remains. Until the 26th Amendment, the voting age had been governed by Statute. And no-one said "boo" about it for a very long time.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 12:30 PM (8y9MW)

540 Yes, but in the meantime, more illegals keep coming in. We can get hung up on those who have already beat the system, or stop the epidemic from continuing to happen. After that, I am all for different means of encouraging/forcing some to leave the country. But getting rid of all illegals is a pipe dream.

Posted by: dan-O at January 29, 2013 12:24 PM (kuRCh)

How will amnesty stop future migration?

Why can't we try a fence and kicking folks out on a massive scale? How can we know they won't work if we don't try them?

Your real problem is fear. You are afraid to do what must be done. Instead you choose to surrender.

Posted by: eman at January 29, 2013 12:31 PM (jp2Ur)

541 The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the urine of Shit Heads.

Posted by: zombie thomas jefferson at January 29, 2013 12:32 PM (ORGYc)

542 "With the implementation of the welfare state, we're basically resigned to national subsistence for the indefinite future."
Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at January 29, 2013 11:49 AM (Ec6wH)

When employing an inherently unsustainable social and economic model, outcome is predictable. I'm no prophet, but I'd guess economic catastrophe is coming sooner than most people think. That trillion-dollar platinum coin idea was a giveaway, especially given the reaction of Krugman and other supposedly serious economists and financial experts, all of whom promoted the idea to one degree or another and all of whom were/are members of the Progressive Left. When a wildly desperate financial gambit is entertained by those close to the seat of power, then one can only guess at the genuine panic going on behind the scenes. This economiccrisis is coming at speed and will be on us in months, not years. Rising inflation and real unemployment,hidden as much as possible by government and mediathe last fewyears,will explode and there will be no way to hide it any more.

I give it two years, at most. Perhaps that explains the low-profile, go along and get alongapproach advocated by Ryan and others in GOP leadership circles. They know the numbers as well as anyone. Maybe what they're doing is the political equivalent of keeping their heads down just before blast.

Posted by: troyriser at January 29, 2013 12:32 PM (vtiE6)

543 Ok, explain how to avoid this scenario.



Person deemed unfit for physical duty so they spend their time as a paper pusher. I have no idea how this would make them appreciate their citizenship/rights more. If anything, I think it would have the opposite effect. They've had to go through years of drudgery to achieve their goal. And in the end, what have they sacrificed to achieve their citizenship? What values were instilled in them through paperwork?


Now you have the person who is deemed fit and serves in a combat role. He risks life and limb in order to get the exact same thing that the guy who sat on his ass got. He will have nothing but contempt for the paper pusher and likely despise the system that allowed it to happen.


How is this better?

Posted by: BCochran1981 at January 29, 2013 12:33 PM (da5Wo)

544 Today in our how to lose elections and be out of power for the forseeable future, 101, we introduce you to the mindnumbingly idiotic debate over amnesty for illegal aliens.

Yes they violated laws to come here and work.

Yes they pay no taxes, also illegal.

No one indicates that this is other than correct.

Their kids born here are US citizens and are growing up and voting.

So, we have two approaches, and they are non overlapping.

One is we can create a guest worker program so that all workers become documented, pay taxes, and are accounted for, even if they came here in an undocumented manner. And give them a path to citizenship if they wish. With specific prohibitions on people with criminal convictions or known nefarious intent.

Or two, we can continue to scream from the rafters that they are illegal, should be treated as criminals, kicked out enmasse, detained, imprisoned.

The first way increases our tax roles, increases productivity, helps the economy, etc.

The second way guarantees that we will spend a long ... long time ... in the backwaters of political power, as the kids from these "illegals" will have a long ... long memory. And by the way, we aren't helping businesses by doing this, we aren't helping the economy by doing this.

This is the party of Akin, of Mourdock, of Angle. And of punishing illegal immigrants. Yeah, I think I know what they will choose.

This is a lost debate. You have to accept that it is lost, and move on. Or beat this dead horse forever, while everyone else has moved on.

A GOP candidate should never, under any circumstances, open their mouth on this issue, other than do actually say something intelligent and useful. Just like socons should keep their traps locked shut when they see all these things that grind their gears so badly, because they are a small minority, and they give voice to their wildest fantasies about reforming the culture of this country and of the world, we are going to see the GOP remain the beaten party.

You can't effect change unless you are in power. You can't get into power unless you swear off publicly saying stupid shit. You can't get into power if you beat stupid arguments that you've lost years ago (illegal immigrants, marriage, etc.) to death in public.

Get over it, deal with it.

Posted by: Joe in MI at January 29, 2013 12:34 PM (3R8wQ)

545 526 TSRBike,

not being cryptic at all....

hey guess what US fucking citizenship either means something or it doesn't....well evidently it doesn't so let's just abolish the INS throw open the doors and smile and say "we're all Americans now" to EVERYONE who makes it here....

handing a mexican national who still flied the mexican flag and still votes in mexico whose Mexican official tells them how they should probably vote in PSAs on Telemundo is just as if not more retarded.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 12:39 PM (LRFds)

546
AllenG: your comparison is silly because killing in war is not equivalent to murder. Honestly, you are trying to be too clever. You said "You keep conflating individual deportations...and mass deportation". A massive number of individual deportations is, by definition, mass deportation. You may have different ideas on how it could potentially be carried out, but the English language remains what it is.

Posted by: dan-O at January 29, 2013 12:42 PM (kuRCh)

547 "How many people of color surround you and your neighbors in Vermont? My guess is a precious few, and they would be your landscapers."

In Vermont, they use Canucks for landscaping. Well, snowscaping.

Posted by: Fox2! at January 29, 2013 12:45 PM (1Qpmy)

548 "The issue is that actually accomplishing mass deportation is, politically speaking, a masturbatory pipe dream. "


Why deport them? Grant them work visas. Let them stay. Just don't give them voting rights. Require them to buy their own health insurance. Some very sensible things can be done that wouldn't involve bulldozers herding people back into Mexico.

Posted by: Andrew at January 29, 2013 12:45 PM (HS3dy)

549 The very first thing to do is to replace the name Marco Rubio with the name Ted Cruz. The former is an opportunistic ethnic hustler like Al Sharpton. The latter is a conservative.

Better yet is to turn "Rubio" into a pejorative part of speech, as in "That proposal's just too Rubio" and "Don't Rubio your constituents"


Posted by: Peter at January 29, 2013 12:45 PM (GUcJW)

550 Haitians escaping Canada.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/15/us/15border.html

I can't make this shit up.



Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs a beer at January 29, 2013 11:08 AM (ZKzrr)

Parasites seeking a new host. They aren't escaping, because we aren't holding them captive, and truth be told, only the Left here really want them (as long as they stay in their own neighborhoods, of course). They just don't like the terms under which they allowed to remain in Canada.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at January 29, 2013 12:47 PM (29+x5)

551 It is to laugh, in that dark sort of way.

Posted by: nip at January 29, 2013 12:50 PM (11Tdq)

552 Ok, explain how to avoid this scenario.

The reason (way back up thread) I hesitated to give the SST model even the name "theory."

But, the practical answer is: "you don't." And then you just hope you get enough people who do appreciate their own sacrifice for their Franchise that they outweigh the rest.

A massive number of individual deportations is, by definition, mass
deportation. You may have different ideas on how it could potentially be
carried out, but the English language remains what it is.


Now you're the one trying to be "too clever." We work within the limits of the language we have, and connotation is often as important as (and sometimes more important than) denotation.

Moreover, I have clarified exactly what I mean by using the term "Mass deportation," and why I believe it is qualitatively different from incidental migration which happens to occur "on a massive scale" (I actually don't think it would, btw- I think most would self deport if they saw real enforcement coming down the pipe).

That's also why I provided an alternative example. Is the fact that our court system is positively inundated with drunk (or other impaired) driving cases proof that we have "mass enforcement" of those laws, or is it simply the fact we catch that many?

When someone claims opponents of amnesty want "to deport all 11 million" they are referring to my definition of "mass deportation," not simply actually deporting illegals when found, but seeking them out and loading them up on some convoy of buses and airplanes. It is either naive or disingenuous to claim otherwise.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 12:51 PM (8y9MW)

553 550 Alberta Oil Peon.

Yup...no I respect your guys' system I just hate your left's hypocrisy towards my nation on the same matter.

I want to work, and help an organized group succeed at a set of tasks and missions.

I am not evil.

Posted by: sven10077 at January 29, 2013 01:06 PM (LRFds)

554 I fail to see how helicopters without a name solve that problem.


Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 29, 2013 11:34 AM (0q2P7)

By making anonymous phone calls to 911, of course.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at January 29, 2013 01:12 PM (29+x5)

555 Can we stop with the Rubio '16 talk now? Please? A plan like this puts him on my "ignore" list.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at January 29, 2013 01:20 PM (NWGUG)

556 Like I said, I'm okay with that approach. I'm also
okay with having to pay (net) taxes to get to vote. Whatever we do, a
"universal" franchise is a silly, even childish idea.


Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 29, 2013 11:53


In one sentence: "You have to have skin in the game if you want to have a say in how it's played."

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at January 29, 2013 01:37 PM (29+x5)

557 Someone at the GOP should start "compromising" and demand that actions to preserve gun rights will be given for immigration/debt restrictions.

If they aren't going to fight back now the people should be able to fight back when necessary.

Posted by: WheelmanForHire at January 29, 2013 01:44 PM (l8nIR)

558 We've already lost the war on illegal immigration. The GOP has become irrelevant.

Posted by: Capt. Obvious at January 29, 2013 06:28 PM (oyQVv)

559 So.... what you are proposing, Sen Rubio, is "de facto green card".

Posted by: CBrown at January 29, 2013 07:59 PM (xsGW+)

560 "In short...illegals will gain immediate legal status upon enactment of
the law with no penalty until some unidentified time far off in the
future."

Sounds like what happens to Republicans on budget battles. They agree to future "cuts" for taxes now, and those cuts either don't happen, or turn out not to be actual cuts at all.

Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at January 30, 2013 06:49 PM (vd7A8)






Processing 0.09, elapsed 0.118 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0449 seconds, 569 records returned.
Page size 338 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat