Thread: October 21st Pro-Amnesty March (Organizing a Counter-rally)

Originally Posted by opinion

Originally Posted by Shapka

I decided to put this in General Discussion in order to alert you to a march from Union Square to Times Square planned for October 21st by a coalition of pro-illegal alien, pro-amnesty organizations from New York State and New York City.

There is a group of people from New York and New Jersey planning a counter-demonstration, which will be espousing an anti-illegal alien, anti-amnesty message.

Here's a link describing what will be happening that day:

http://nyprotest.flactivist.org/?p=4659

Anyone who wants to-and is able-to participate in countering this march-or knows anyone living in the Tri-State Area who will be able to-send me a pm, or an e-mail-and I'll give you further details of what we'll be planning to counteract the pro-amnesty hordes.

-good times, G.J.P. (Jr.)

Shapka, did you notice that they had the children up front? See how they use the children.

Yeah, in fact they trotted out some ten year-old-whose mother was supposedly deported back to Jamaica-in order to tug at the heartstrings of the media.



I was able to dislodge one of the reporters from WNBC-Monica Morales-despite their best efforts to throw me out of the rally and get her to cover our side of the issue.

I need opinions on what to do. My main issue in the following elections is "Illegal immigration" and my reason is not for me, but my children, and grand-children, they are not aware of what is coming, but I am.

So, my problem is that in my state NJ the two candidates MENENDEZ AND KEAN are both for amnesty. MENENDEZ admits that he is for a working program which eventually they will earned citizenship. KEAN does not committ himself, but everyone knows that he voted for the McCain, KENNEDY proposal.

SO? What would you do?

Kean couldn't vote for that bill, since he wasn't a member of Congress when it was being debated.

Originally Posted by Shapka

Kean couldn't vote for that bill, since he wasn't a member of Congress when it was being debated.

You are right, but he said somewhere that he is for a working program, or something like that. To tell you the truth, I have not heard it myself, when they were debating they hardly spoke about immigration.

Do you know exactly what is his position on this?

Originally Posted by opinion

Originally Posted by Shapka

Kean couldn't vote for that bill, since he wasn't a member of Congress when it was being debated.

You are right, but he said somewhere that he is for a working program, or something like that. To tell you the truth, I have not heard it myself, when they were debating they hardly spoke about immigration.

Do you know exactly what is his position on this?

Yeah, that's the problem.

He's evasive, to say the least.

He hammered Menendez's support for amnesty during the early months of the campaign-without really explaining where he was on the issue-then dropped the issue like a lead stone.

The only way Menendez-a Democrat-was going to be defeated was if Kean had taken a strong anti-amnesty, anti-illegal stance and hammered it home throughout the campaign.

Instead what he's done is regurgitate the same timeworn-if accurate-charge that the Democrats in New Jersey are corrupt pond scum.

Yeah, and...?

They're still going to beat the pants off of him.

When Kean loses he should ask all of those high-priced campaign consultants for a refund.

Originally Posted by Shapka

Originally Posted by opinion

Originally Posted by Shapka

Kean couldn't vote for that bill, since he wasn't a member of Congress when it was being debated.

You are right, but he said somewhere that he is for a working program, or something like that. To tell you the truth, I have not heard it myself, when they were debating they hardly spoke about immigration.

Do you know exactly what is his position on this?

Yeah, that's the problem.

He's evasive, to say the least.

He hammered Menendez's support for amnesty during the early months of the campaign-without really explaining where he was on the issue-then dropped the issue like a lead stone.

The only way Menendez-a Democrat-was going to be defeated was if Kean had taken a strong anti-amnesty, anti-illegal stance and hammered it home throughout the campaign.

Instead what he's done is regurgitate the same timeworn-if accurate-charge that the Democrats in New Jersey are corrupt pond scum.

Yeah, and...?

They're still going to beat the pants off of him.

When Kean loses he should ask all of those high-priced campaign consultants for a refund.

I have news for you Shapka. I just saw the two of them, they were interviewed individually, Menendez said on immigration that he is for amnesty because it was impossible to deport all those people, and that it will be a lost of 300 billion. He also spoke about high taxes, and no child left behind. But if he if for giving amnesty to all illegals how can he relief the high taxes? New Jersey is invaded by illegals with many many children.

Kean said that he opposes amnesty, that he believes that this is a country of immigrants, but it is also a country of laws, and that employers should be penalized for hiring illegals, and they should go home, and come the right way. The only thing I don't like about him is his speech, and looks as if he was a robot, repeating something he learned, I don't know. but I think seeing both of them today help me a lot to make my decision. I'm not convinced about Kean, but I'm willing to give him a chance because even if he is lying about immigration, at least he said that he opposes it. So Menendez is out of the question for me. As I said, to me this is the most important thing.

The only thing I can tell you-without equivocation of any kind-is that you can't vote for Menendez if you care about enforcing our immigration laws and securing our borders, which I assume you do since you're a member of this website.

Like I said, Kean could have-potentially-pulled this race out-which would have been a miracle in the blue fever-swamp known as the Garden State-but he blew it.

No one cares about corruption, least of all people who are inclined to vote for NJ Democrats. If Kean had focused solely on immigration-and hammered home his differences with Menendez-then perhaps he could have won this race.

Originally Posted by Shapka

The only thing I can tell you-without equivocation of any kind-is that you can't vote for Menendez if you care about enforcing our immigration laws and securing our borders, which I assume you do since you're a member of this website.

Like I said, Kean could have-potentially-pulled this race out-which would have been a miracle in the blue fever-swamp known as the Garden State-but he blew it.

No one cares about corruption, least of all people who are inclined to vote for NJ Democrats. If Kean had focused solely on immigration-and hammered home his differences with Menendez-then perhaps he could have won this race.

I know what you mean Shapka, this is confusing, and frustrating at the same time, because in other words, neither one is qualified. So then what?

Kean can't be worse than Menendez. If those were my only two choices, I'd be forced to vote Kean. Listen, we know for a fact that Menendez is not going to bend to our will, but perhaps Kean, being the new guy on the block, can be convinced. I see it this way, you either vote for someone you are 100% sure will do anything and everything in his power to encourage and support amnesty and a guest worker program or you vote on the individual you're less than 100% sure about. I'm sorry, but between Kean and Menendez, Kean appears to be the only choice. Based on the following article, Kean doesn't seem like such a bad option, especially when the alternative is Sen. Menendez:

Immigration May Figure in NJ's Close Senate Race
By Kevin Mooney
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
October 04, 2006

(CNSNews.com) - If Republican challenger Tom Kean Jr. pulls off an upset victory against incumbent Sen. Robert Menendez in New Jersey next month, New Jersey will gain an advocate for tighter border security.

If he were a member of the U.S. Senate, Kean would have voted in favor of legislation authorizing construction of a double-layered 700 mile security fence, said Jill Hazelbaker, his press secretary. The Secure Border Act of 2006 passed the full Senate last week by a margin of 80-19. Menendez and Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) both voted against the measure.

The legislation calls for barriers to be constructed along the most porous sections of California, Arizona and Texas. A separate homeland security bill passed on Saturday provides about $1 billion in funding as a down payment for the fence.

Kean has distinguished himself from New Jersey's incumbent senators by favoring an "enforcement first" approach to immigration reform that is more in tune with the House Republicans. While he strongly supports legal immigration, Kean told Cybercast News Service that in the post-9/11 world he believes it is necessary to close vulnerable stretches along the nation's borders that could be exploited by terrorists.

He said he views the security fence as just a first step toward broader immigration reform. Kean also said he favors legislation that would provide for additional border agents, detention facilities and the use of high technology at points of entry.

If elected, Kean said he would work to maintain a welcoming attitude toward legal immigrants. But at the same time, he would encourage his colleagues to uphold the rule of law. Kean told Cybercast News Service that he opposes the Senate's "comprehensive" immigration bill (S. 2611) because he believes it contains too many "amnesty" provisions. He also criticized Menendez for supporting the legislation.

Specifically, Kean expressed opposition toward language in the Senate bill that he claims would make it possible for illegal aliens to collect social security and other government benefits.

"I would have opposed the Senate bill because it granted a direct path to citizenship and because it granted amnesty to people who entered this country illegally and broke our laws," he said. "I don't see how we can send a message to the world that says the easiest path to success in this country is to break the law."

Political analysts and pollsters who spoke with Cybercast News Service said it is difficult to find tangible statistical evidence linking public policy positions on immigration reform with likely voting patterns. Nevertheless, they do see anecdotal evidence suggesting that key blocks of voters who normally support the Democratic candidate in N.J. are withholding support thus far, and they say immigration could figure into the equation.

Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University-Gannett New Jersey Poll, cited "underlying trends" and "unspoken effects" associated with immigration that may explain the lack of enthusiasm some Democrats and Independents have toward the Menendez campaign.

"A good chunk of Democrats are holding back," Murray said. "If they have negative attitudes toward immigration they are more likely to be undecided."

As Cybercast News Service previously reported, the latest Monmouth Poll shows Kean leading Menendez by six points among likely voters. When voters were asked, in the same poll, which candidate better shared their views on immigration, Murray found a slight preference for Kean.

But the most important factor that stands beyond statistical measurement may be the Hispanic name attached to the Democratic candidate, which translates into a lack of support among independents who traditionally lean Democratic, Murray said.

This sentiment is shared by Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for politics.

"The voter's mind can work in mysterious ways," he said. "The people I talk to you in New Jersey in both parties tell me they think Menendez's Hispanic origin is costing him in various ways."

Recent events indicate that opposition to illegal immigration in N.J. finds expression when residents see a correlation with rising costs. The township committee in Riverside, N.J., voted unanimously this past summer in favor of passing an ordinance that would impose penalties on individuals who provide either housing or jobs to illegal aliens. The ordinance provides penalties of up to $1,000 and makes it possible for employers to lose their local business license.

Sen. Menendez has voiced opposition to the Riverside ordinance. Kean told Cybercast News Service the Riverside ordinance was a byproduct of local frustration with inaction on Capitol Hill. Moreover, Kean says, his opponent is partly responsible for the "hyper-partisanship" that has contributed to the stagnation on Capitol Hill, particularly with regard to immigration policy.

"I personally don't think municipalities should be setting national policy," Kean said. Instead, he says independent voices are needed on Capitol Hill that seek to build consensus so legislation can move in a timely fashion.

Despite the disparities that exist between the House and Senate immigration bills, Kean points out that there are areas of convergence on border security that can serve as the foundation for constructive legislation.

"Bob Menendez always reaches into his partisan corner, as opposed to reaching across the aisle to find common solutions," Kean said. "He's been in Congress for 14 years blaming others for what he hasn't done."

Repeated phone calls to the Menendez campaign seeking comment on immigration policy and border security legislation were not returned.

Polls show that Kean is either slightly ahead or tied with Menendez in a state that has not elected a Republican as senator since 1972.

Kean is a state senator and the son of a popular former governor. Menendez served as congressman in Hudson County for 14 years prior to being appointed senator in January - replacing Democrat Jon Corzine, who vacated the seat to become the state's governor.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp ... 1004c.html

Personally, I don't see that you have a choice. Plus, voting for Kean will help the Republicans maintain control of the Senate. Remember, all but 4 of 44 Democrats in the Senate voted for S. 2611, while only 23 of 55 Republicans voted for it. That should tell you all you need to know - vote Tom Kean Jr.

A lot of people want to blame all Senate Republicans for voting passage of S. 2611, but the truth is the Democrats were the main reason the bill passed the Senate - over 50% of the Republicans voted against the shamnesty bill, while less than 10% of the Democrats voted against it. Folks need to wake-up and realize that the Republican party is our only chance at avoiding amnesty and a guest worker program.

Don't get me wrong, if faced with voting for a Democrat that is against a path to legalization for illegals and a massive guest worker program or a Republican like John McCain, you probably should vote for the Democrat, but please be very sure the Democrat is not the kind of person that will fold to the will of his or her party (voting for a Democrat, even one that says he is against amnesty is not without risk, because Ted Kennedy can be mighty convincing ).

To a certain degree, that's true.

But that's a reason that they should retain control of the House-which looks like an increasingly unlikely scenario-not the Senate.