Thread: U.S. Senator Jon Kyl Americans are frustrated

http://kyl.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=277136

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
June 18, 2007

CONTACT:
Andrew Wilder or Ryan Patmintra (202) 224-4521Kyl on Immigration: If I Were the Only One Writing this Bill, it Would be very Different
By U.S. Senator Jon Kyl Americans are frustrated because our government has failed to live up to its responsibility to control our borders and stop the flow of illegal immigration.
Since the current immigration bill was pulled off the Senate schedule a week ago, at least 50,000 new illegal immigrants have crossed over our borders. Every day the situation continues to get worse and something has to be done about it.
The immigration bill being considered in the Senate is far from perfect. If I were the only one writing this bill, it would be very different. But it is the first strong, bipartisan consensus for enforcing our laws and securing the border.
Much of the existing law, enacted in 1986, is unenforceable – especially the requirement that employers verify eligibility for employment. To cite just one problem, employers have to rely on documents that are easily counterfeited. So it is not enough just to say “enforce the lawâ€

Originally Posted by chairman

This bill is tougher and more enforceable than past law and has automatic funding for enforcement in it.

I am sure that it is similar to the "automatic funding" that "built" the fence we now have...

When did Kyl become one of the bad guys?

Originally Posted by millere

Originally Posted by chairman

This bill is tougher and more enforceable than past law and has automatic funding for enforcement in it.

I am sure that it is similar to the "automatic funding" that "built" the fence we now have...

When did Kyl become one of the bad guys?

Hell I'm still waiting for our borders to be secured after 9-11 and that will be 6 years ago this September. I don't care how much money their going to throw out there to "secure our borders" but sorry this AMERICAN ain't buying it.

When did Kyl become one of the bad guys?

When Bush promised him a Federal Building named after him or some other promise that filled his bloated ego!

When Bush promised him a Federal Building named after him or some other promise that filled his bloated ego!

Oh my gosh. I forgot about that.

Just why don't they pass just laws that will make it easier to enforce the laws of 1986 instead of giving giving amnesty.There they go thinking we are stupid again.


.................................................. .................................................. .......
RED ALERT
LAST DAY FOR DONATIONS HELP GET MILLIONS INVLOVED
"IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT
............................Check out this link everyone!!.................................[/b]
http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=F ... ic&t=68894
LETS SAVE OUR COUNTRY FROM THIS INVASION! We need everone envolved even you LOOKIE LOU'S yes you come on CALLS, FAXES AND E-MAILS TO OUR SENATORS!!
DAILY INSTRUCTIONS AND POSTING THREAD LINK BELOW!
Leave posts so we know what they are saying!
http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=F ... c&p=392574
ALL CONTACT INFORMATION.....Senators, news, radio, ETC.
http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=F ... ic&t=68216

(1) The status quo is not defensible;

George Bush, Jon Kyl, Teddy Kennedy and John McCain are the status quo.

Wow... Worker verification huh? So that's the big issue here? That's the real reason why we need this exact reform bill! That's what is most important to Americans! That won't be the first thing to fall through the cracks... or maybe right after the $5000 penalty that will go to pay for it all. It will work for sure this time.

How patronizing can you get? He even tries to sound like a martyr.

In other words they knowingly and intentionally don't enforce the immigration laws for 21 years, and then say OK maybe we will finally enforce them but you have to let the 20 million illegals stay that we let in!!

It's like a bank robber saying "OK, I might stop robbing banks, but you have to let me keep my stolen money"!!

He and Graham and McCain and Bush could go after the Democrats and say exactly that to force an enforcement only bill, but instead they join with them in this giant scam!! They are holding the American people hostage to get what they want by purposely not securing the border. It would be like the bank robber holding a hostage to get away and keep the money. It seems our Senators and President are simply well dressed thugs!!

I wonder at what point, or if it ever occurs to these folk, that the American people are not at all stupid. There has been every known form of marketing for this bill, reframing of its public image, changes to the rhetoric surrounding it, changes of semantics in reference to it and simple and obvious lying about it.

There are already laws in existence that take care of absolutely everything. There is no need for any new legislation. It amazes me how a senate full of outcast lawyers assumes we know nothing of the rule of law.

Once rule of law is violated, by allowing foreigners to lobby our government to change the laws which they have violated, there is no going back. At this point any behavior is justified, since we have entered the realm of cosmopolitan justification and elite mandated releveance.

Laws must be concrete. What actually propels the downward sprial even more in this particular case is the presented excuse for not enforcing the law. Last year the naftists claimed it was logistics, "impossible to do because of numbers." This year they are changing the "excuse" slightly, but it still about logistics. This post characterization makes the statement: "Laws are meanignless if the amount of people who break them make it difficult to enforce." In association with our leadership, the statement is made: "Even the President of the United States thinks it is okay to break the law, he is encouraging us to do it!" The figurehead for justice and leadership has created anarchy, or at least planted its seed. From this point on everything is justifiable thru cosmopolitan semantics. This may even be the case if amnesty doesn't pass if no action is taken to enforce the laws currently on the books.

Senator Kyl is a traitor, no matter how he paints it. It is utter moral insanity that with the amount of contention those with common sense have for this bill because of its CONTENT, he would push the concepts of consensus by concession. As if the bill is the ONLY solution currently. What kind of person would intentionally ignore the fact that the problem is an intentional refusal to enforce current laws? It is like Kyl does not recoginze the rights of anyone else and sees his own self serving desires as permissible, regardless of the law. His desire is melded with the desires of some others. what really scares me about Kyl and the Amnesty dealers is that they have no sense of responsibility, they don't seem to learn from their mistakes and they truly have no real moral sense. No desire to help their own people, let alone listen to their plees. There is some sort of madness running wild...

Rule of Law is simple to understand:

The difference between "rule by law" and "rule of law" is important. Under the rule "by" law, law is an instrument of the government, and the government is above the law. In contrast, under the rule "of" law, no one is above the law, not even the government. The core of "rule of law" is an autonomous legal order. Under rule of law, the authority of law does not depend so much on law's instrumental capabilities, but on its degree of autonomy, that is, the degree to which law is distinct and separate from other normative structures such as politics and religion. As an autonomous legal order, rule of law has at least three meanings. First, rule of law is a regulator of government power. Second, rule of law means equality before law. Third, rule of law means procedural and formal justice. We will take up these meanings of rule of law one by one.

First, as a power regulator, rule of law has two functions: it limits government arbitrariness and power abuse, and it makes the government more rational and its policies more intelligent.

The opposite of rule of law is rule of person. There are two kinds of rule of person. The first kind is "rule of the few persons," examples of which include tyranny and oligarchy. The second kind of rule of person is "rule of the many persons," an example of which is the ancient Greek democracies. The common feature of rule of person is the ethos that "what pleases the ruler(s) is law." That is, under rule of person, there is no limit to what the rulers (the government) can do and how they do things.