Thread: Curious

Originally Posted by Draconis

The easiest way to tackle the illegal immigration problem is to legalize all illegal aliens. Why are you against amnesty?

Why are you for rewarding people who broke one of our laws when they came across the border? Why are you for rewarding people who use fake documents to get jobs? Why are you for rewarding people who jam our hospital emergency rooms and overcrowd our schools?

What do you say to the millions worldwide who are trying to go through the immigration process legally? We have members here whose families have been trying for years to come here legally.

Final question, how would you benefit from granting amnesty to the 20,000,000+ already here and the thousands more sneaking across the border daily?

Lastly Drac. The following is part of S2611 and it will not become law.

It has already happened. The McCain-Kennedy bill drastically raises legal immigration.

Dixie

Draconis..............
How do you think Mexico or any other country for that matter would feel if we......AMERICANS........were to sneak into their country? Should we...AMERICANS.......think it would be ok to be there ILLEGALLY? What would other countries do to us.......AMERICANS......if pulled crap like what Mexico and all the other countries are pulling on us?
Why do you and ILLEGALS think anyone who is in THIS country ILLEGALLY, HAS A RIGHT to be here, when we.......AMERICANS......wouldn't be in your countries?
WHY DO ANY OF YOU FEEL YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE HERE ILLEGALLY?
You have a right to be in this country as long as you do it ACCORDING TO OUR LAWS. Your laws in your country has nothing to do with OUR COUNTRY. ANYONE IN OUR COUNTRY ILLEGALLY HAS NO RIGHTS....IN FACT, ACCORDING TO OUR LAWS.........ANYONE IN OUR COUNTRY ILLEGALLY IS A CRIMINAL. A CRIMINAL WITHOUT RIGHTS IN THIS COUNTRY.
Mexico, nor any other country is part of the United States of America.
The USA is a country in it's own........just as Mexico is it's own country. No other country has any rights or business telling us how to run OUR COUNTRY.......just as we have no rights or business telling your country how to run their country.

This is still a Democracy, isn't it ?

I am beginning to wonder about that Legal. I read a brief from the Supreme Court (2004) severely admonishing Bush et al for violating the Constitution and multiple Federal codes with regard to their proposed open road policy regarding Mexican truck drivers. At issue was the question whether or not international trade agreements superceded the Constitution and laws of this nation. The answer was NO.

I still see Bush et al continuing to press for this issue as well as making plans to open a traffic corridor right through the heart of this nation.

So if the Supreme Court rules Bush is in violation not only of the Constitution but of Federal codes and that international treaty agreements do NOT supercede the Constitution and infact compling with the requirements of these agreements is a violation of his oath of office ... why does he continue to pursue the open road policy for Mexican truckers and place international law above Constitutional Law?

Sounds like a dictatorship not a Democracy with checks and balances in place to me.

Here's the brief if your interested. http://www.eagleforum.org/briefs/MexicanTruckBrief.pdf

Originally Posted by LegalUSCitizen

They tried, but we stopped them, Draconis. They're still trying and we're still stopping them. Maybe pretty soon they will undertand that the American people are against these plans they keep coming up with. I know they're hard headed, up there. It can't be denied that President Bush does not like to change his plans for anyone, HOWEVER, he will have to come to grips with the fact that although he is the president, it is "the American people" who hold the power in this country.

We haven't stopped them. They won in the Senate. Their plan to massively increase legal immigration and gut what enforcement is already in place has passed. Bush will sign the bill as soon as it reaches his desk. The only obstacle in their way now is the House and Pence and his fellow sell out conservatives are ready to bend over and give Dubya what he wants.

Good morning everybody - finally got my act together this morning.

Draconis: Welcome to our forum. I see in your original posting that you asked:

What is the point of this website?

Well, frankly, to point out the obvious, ALIPAC stands for Americans for LEGAL Immigration PAC.

In reading through some of your other posts, I have a question for you--

You own a home, a nice home, on, let's say 10 acres of nice land. Someone takes up squatting rights both in you home and on your land, without your invitation. And then, the government decides that you need to give up part of your land and part of your nice home to the squatters who are 'less fortunate'.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't that the basis of communism? Take from the "haves" and give to the "have nots".

The fact that there are 12-20 ILLEGAL immigrants (who broke the law) already in this country does not justify that the citizens of this country should turn their backs on the issue and say - "Oh, it's all right".

I didn't notice if anyone here had directed you to a video made by Roy Beck of NumbersUSA. It's called "Gumball Immigration". It is an outstanding reason for border and immigration control

Let me add my good ole standby:

The USA is like a lifeboat. If too many people try to get on too quickly, the lifeboat will capsize and probably sink, and everyone will die.

An elephant must be eaten in small bites to be completely cosumed.

ALIPAC has absolutely no problem with LEGAL immigrants. The problem lies with the illegals.

And last, but not at all least --

Consider the LEGAL immigrants, who waited in line, filed all the paperwork, went thru the exhausting process, became true citizens, learning the language and adapting to our culture.

Isn't it a monumental slap in the face to them if we simply allow people who broke the laws of this country to be given amnesty?

Originally Posted by ruthiela

Mexico, nor any other country is part of the United States of America.The USA is a country in it's own........just as Mexico is it's own country. No other country has any rights or business telling us how to run OUR COUNTRY.......just as we have no rights or business telling your country how to run their country.

There is an extremely important difference between Mexico and America. Mexico is an ethnostate. It's a country for Mexicans. If you tried to sneak into Mexico, as Guatemalans regularly do, you would be kicked out. Don't get your hopes up about immigrating there legally either. Mexicans are under no illusions that the world's population has any so-called "right" to immigrate to Mexico. They are perfectly content to say: this is our country, and we would like to keep it that way. The same is true of India, China, Iran, South Korea, Japan, etc.

This is not true of the United States. The United States styles itself as a "nation of immigrants" and a "universal nation" and other high minded nonsense of that nature. America is the Walmart of the world. Anyone can walk right in and take whatever they want. The whole focus on "illegal immigration" amounts to this: come into our house, prop your feet up on the couch, by all means, make yourself perfectly at home, but whatever you do, come into our house through the front door, not the back door. The unquestioned assumption is that we should have hundreds of thousands of people, millions of people, coming here and settling in the United States and changing our country forever in a way the majority of our citizens find undesirable. Instead, the whole debate on the restrictionist side has been reduced to one over legal technicalities. What sense does that make?

We have by far the most irrational immigration policy in the entire world. I'm not aware of any other country more liberal on immigration that the United States. That's right. The Netherlands and Canada, believe it or not, are more "conservative" on immigration than we are. The Canadians ask: is this person a plus or a minus for Canada? The Australians ask: does this person have valuable skills that are needed in Australia? The Japanese don't even bother to ask such questions because they take for granted that Japan is for the Japanese.

By reducing the debate to legal technicalities, the OBL has a free hand to turn around and advocate radically increasing the already outrageous level of legal immigration. Then all the illegals will simply immigrate here legally, which will be even worse than the status quo.

Originally Posted by Draconis

This is not true of the United States. The United States styles itself as a "nation of immigrants" and a "universal nation" and other high minded nonsense of that nature. America is the Walmart of the world. Anyone can walk right in and take whatever they want. The whole focus on "illegal immigration" amounts to this: come into our house, prop your feet up on the couch, by all means, make yourself perfectly at home, but whatever you do, come into our house through the front door, not the back door. The unquestioned assumption is that we should have hundreds of thousands of people, millions of people, coming here and settling in the United States and changing our country forever in a way the majority of our citizens find undesirable. Instead, the whole debate on the restrictionist side has been reduced to one over legal technicalities. What sense does that make?
.

Where in the world did you get the Idea that "Anyone can walk right in and take whatever they want."?

If you feel that way, Draconis.....will you join with us and fight for what is right for our country? We would like for you to do that and we would appreciate your help very much.

Nobody can just walk right in and take what they want, unless our laws are not being enforced which is the case here. And where does it say that american taxpayers have to foot the bill for all of these freeloaders? They take far more than they put into the system, they are a drain on our economy. Cut off the incentives that draw them here and they will go back to where they came from.