Thread: Amnesty? Bureaucrats already drawing up plan to implement

Originally Posted by DarthIllegal

Originally Posted by MW

Bettybb wrote:

Both the Repubs and the Dems are running scared because of the AZ law.

There is a reason Mexico's President Calderon is coming to see Obama next week. Panic city.

Repubs and Dems will attempt to pass amensty in one form or another before the AZ law goes into effect, because once it does, Americans will see that enforcement works.

It looks to me like the fix is in. Both parties have reached a deal.

Why do you keep spreading misinformation, Bettybb? The Republicans in the U.S. Congress have no intention of working with the Democrats on passing an amnesty bill in the near future. The so-called leadership has said as much, repeatedly. Actually, many of them have voiced their strong disapproval to the Democrats regarding the subject. What do you hope to gain by painting the Republicans and Democrats with the same brush on this issue? As I've told you before, the majority of Democrats in the U.S. Congress support illegal alien amnesty and the majority of Republicans don't. Heck, even Graham and McCain are afraid to touch the subject at this point in time. Once the elctions are over, I'm sure they'll start beating the amnesty drums again. However, that will be after the Arizona law is already active.

[quote:1ynwtz5d]Check out what Beck and O'Reilly are saying about guest worker amnesty.

Beck and O'Reilly don't create or approve law.

MAn, can I have some of the "forget" juice that you are drinking? So what you are telling me is that there are no such thing as Republicans that support amnesty? I have heard of "head in the sand syndrome" but you sir take the cake![/quote:1ynwtz5d]

I can do without your personal insults, DarthIllegal. Intelligent debate is always welcome, but not personal attacks.

Perhaps you should read what I wrote again because obviously you weren't paying close attention the first time. Not once have I ever said there were no Republicans in the U.S. Congress that didn't support amnesty. What I have said, repeatedly mind you, is that the majority of Republicans in the Congress do not support amnesty and the majority of Dems do. Glad I could clear that up for you.

Bettybb wrote:

The GOP leadership and spin doctors continue to say "Secure our Borders First".. Note the "First". What comes after securing our borders?

Debate comes after securing the border.

I've yet to hear anyone say there will be an amnesty after the borders are secured. However, I'll admit that there are Republicans saying the border must be secured before any discussion on the issue of amnesty can take place. I think you're intelligent enough to know that a promised 'discussion' doesn't automatically mean you're going to get what you want.

Everyone in congress should be reminded this from their precious "lyin of the senate"....Since the 1986 shamnesty we've seen an increase in legal visas, we have seen our border remain wide open, and we are seeing the ethnic mix being upset. About the only thing he got right was that the Africa/Asia aren't where most illegal aliens are coming from. Lastly we should hold them to the promise that there would never again be another shamnesty!

"First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same.... Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset.... Contrary to the charges in some quarters, [the bill] will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and deprived nations of Africa and Asia.... In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change as sharply as the critics seem to think.... It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs." "This amnesty will give citizenship to only 1.1 to 1.3 million illegal aliens. We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this."

Ted Kennedy

Originally Posted by Bettybb

I think we are in for a very long haul.

You are absolutely right, Betty. There are powerful forces allied against us. A couple years ago we beat back the McCain/Kennedy amnesty plan (crushed it like a bug!). But they are going to come at us again. And I think we are even stronger now and we are not just going to crush it, we're gonna slam it back in their face like a tennis volley smash. Be ready for it, everybody!

tiredofit,

I find your comment to be somewhat ambigous. I believe Alipac is against racism. All people are welcome and wanted, no matter where they come from in the world. if they immigrate here legally.

MW wrote,

Debate comes after securing the border.

I've yet to hear anyone say there will be an amnesty after the borders are secured. However, I'll admit that there are Republicans saying the border must be secured before any discussion on the issue of amnesty can take place. I think you're intelligent enough to know that a promised 'discussion' doesn't automatically mean you're going to get what you want.

Well, I have heard McCain say that "Secure the border First"", and then go on to say that is impossible for us to force 13 million people to leave.

I have heard the GOP elite talk about "Secure the border First", then go on to talk about the need for "guest workers." They imply that the illegal aliens ( and only them) will be the guest workers! That's amnesty.

Then you get Glen Beck and O'Reilly, the spin doctors for the Dems and GOP stating clearing they want guest worker amnesty....well.....

It would be great if the GOP is just deceiving their big money backers (the 21st century plantation owners) by saying border security FIRST, ... and have no intent to have guest worker amnesty.... but I don't believe it.
Money talks and the GOP is solidly in the pockets of the plantation owners and they want their cheap labor.

But the GOP is being smart about it in terms of their anti amnesty base. The GOP does not say it is against alllowing the illegal aliens to stay which is what the GOP base's position is. Instead the GOP claims its is anti amnesty, then narrowly defines it so that they can say they are not technically lying when they end up supporting pathway amnesty, or guest worker amnesty. The say secure the borders First, and then are not forthcoming about what they want after that. They are not formally taking a stance, so they can weave and dodge whichever way the winds blows.

Originally Posted by Bettybb

tiredofit,

I find your comment to be somewhat ambigous. I believe Alipac is against racism. All people are welcome and wanted, no matter where they come from in the world. if they immigrate here legally.

Let me be a bit more clear then.

Yes I agree we have always welcomed "legal" immigrants. My wife is an immigrant and the ex-wife is of a different race. My son-in-law is Egyptian. His parents are immigrants and legal ones at that. They are Christian and left Egypt because they were being persecuted.

I believe that our traditional numbers should be restored until our current financial crisis is over and legal working Americans are put back to work. If that is counter to ALIPAC, then maybe this isn't a board I should be on.

Our amount of legal immigration by the numbers:

OUR FIRST 200 YEARS TRADITION
1776-1976: 250,000 per year average

THE NEW GUILDED AGE OF MASS IMMIGRATION
1990-2005: 1,000,000+ per year average

Source: http://www.numbersusa.com/overpopulation/immtrad.html

My comment is in no way racist. It simply points out that we have seen an increase of illegal immigration primarily from one part of the world (south of our border) which as Kennedy pointed out wouldn't happen. I referenced no particular race but rather pointed out that nationalities south of the border are too blame for the vast majority of illegal aliens in our country.

Acebackwards,

I agree and read recently that the statistics show that the numbers of Americans that do not support amnesty is continuing to increase. That is good news for us, but the monied interests want amnesty, want cheap labor, want North American Union. If both the Dems and the Repubs join forces and sneak an amnesty through, what can the voters do?

tiredofit wrote,

My comment is in no way racist. It simply points out that we have seen an increase of illegal immigration primarily from one part of the world (south of our border) which as Kennedy pointed out wouldn't happen. I referenced no particular race but rather pointed out that nationalities south of the border are too blame for the vast majority of illegal aliens in our country.

^Five. I agree that the present pro amnesty push is what is racist... giving preferential treatment to Hispanics over all other races and ethnic groups.

Hardlineconstitutionalist wrote to Darthillegal,

I can do without your personal insults, DarthIllegal. Intelligent debate is always welcome, but not personal attacks.

Perhaps you should read what I wrote again because obviously you weren't paying close attention the first time. Not once have I ever said there were no Republicans in the U.S. Congress that didn't support amnesty. What I have said, repeatedly mind you, is that the majority of Republicans in the Congress do not support amnesty and the majority of Dems do. Glad I could clear that up for you.

1. If you are against personal insults, why did you insult Darthillegal by saying "Perhaps you should read what I wrote again because obviously you weren't paying close attention the first time. " and "Glad I could clear that up for you."

2. Darthillegal did not say a majority of Repubs in Congress support amnesty. He said some Repubs do. In another thread you came out in support of guest worker amnesty!

3. The issue is the Repub elite's support of amnesty. Trying to avoid the subject by switching to an irrelevant topic, is a very transparent dodge.

Originally Posted by Bettybb

Hardlineconstitutionalist wrote to Darthillegal,

I can do without your personal insults, DarthIllegal. Intelligent debate is always welcome, but not personal attacks.

Perhaps you should read what I wrote again because obviously you weren't paying close attention the first time. Not once have I ever said there were no Republicans in the U.S. Congress that didn't support amnesty. What I have said, repeatedly mind you, is that the majority of Republicans in the Congress do not support amnesty and the majority of Dems do. Glad I could clear that up for you.

1. If you are against personal insults, why did you insult Darthillegal by saying "Perhaps you should read what I wrote again because obviously you weren't paying close attention the first time. " and "Glad I could clear that up for you."

2. Darthillegal did not say a majority of Repubs in Congress support amnesty. He said some Repubs do. In another thread you came out in support of guest worker amnesty!

3. The issue is the Repub elite's support of amnesty. Trying to avoid the subject by switching to an irrelevant topic, is a very transparent dodge.

I can't believe you're now resorting to making blatant false allegations! I have never, not once, came out in support of a guest-worker amnesty. However, I have repeatedly came out against any and all amnesties. I double-dog dare you to show proof of your allegation. Once you fail to provide proof, I'll expect a full apology!!

As for DarthIllegal's insult, what exactly do you call this?

I have heard of "head in the sand syndrome" but you sir take the cake!

Where I'm from that is a personal insult. What is the difference in that comment and coming right out and calling me ignorant? I'm sorry, I don't see the difference, Bettybb.

Bettybb wrote:

1. If you are against personal insults, why did you insult Darthillegal by saying "Perhaps you should read what I wrote again because obviously you weren't paying close attention the first time. " and "Glad I could clear that up for you."

Those are facts, not insults. He obviously misread what I wrote because I never said or implied the following:

So what you are telling me is that there are no such thing as Republicans that support amnesty?

If you're going to jump into someone elses discussion, please don't misrepresent and/or skew the facts. Thank you.