Thread: A voice of reason on immigration

Rhetoric 101
Anyone that has attended college can see right through these articles. All three are from the same source/writer. The writing itself is full of “fanciful” terms and colorful ideals that have no concrete evidence or serious documentation to support the writers intentions of these articles. What a waste of time and a post to ALIPAC forums.

Maybe Hak51 you should read “Whatever It Takes: Illegal Immigration, Border Security and the War on Terror” by J.D. Hayworth
Or
“Border and Immigration Control” by Michael Kerrigan

At least there is some “truth” and supported documentation.

William/ALIPAC

You wrote in double space format, so let me just fill the blanks in color

Hak,
ALIPAC

Scrutiny is my middle name. The last time I checked, there was a permanent microscope up my rear.
My impression is quite opposite; however, I might be wrong.

Here, let me make it very simple for you.
Here, let me make it very simple for you.

America
America 1905 – 1920

Citizens Vote to elect Representatives.
Citizens Vote to elect Representatives.

Those Representatives debate and pass laws.
Those Representatives debate and pass laws. In particular, Eighteenth Amendment to the national Constitution (ratified January 16, 1919) and the Volstead Act (passed October 28, 1919). Some states banned alcohol as early as in 1905.

The President signs and enforces the laws.
The President signs and enforces the laws. Prohibition began on January 16, 1920, when the Eighteenth Amendment went into effect. Federal Prohibition agents (police) were given the task of enforcing the law. You can verify at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibi..._United_States

Thus, the laws of the nation are derived from American Citizens.
Thus, the laws of the nation are derived from American Citizens, that at least in this one case were wrong.

Do you understand? Do you comprehend? Do you get it? It is the reason America has been so celebrated in history and such a prosperous and stable nation.
Would you replace the prosperity and stability of the times of Prohibition with the today’s chaos caused by current illegal immigration?


America 2006
America 1986

Citizens voted to elect Representatives.
Citizens voted to elect Representatives.

Representatives debated and passed immigration laws.
Representatives debated and passed immigration laws.

Those laws are signed and to be enforced by the President.
Those laws were signed by President Regan and to be enforced by his and following administrations.

Wealthy Corporations and Banks have persuaded the President not to enforce the laws.
As it was with Prohibition, the current immigration law is good in general. However, every time when an individual, let it be an employer, law enforcement officer or a foreigner, look at the particular case, in their conscience, they find multiple reasons to feel excused from obeying or enforcing this law just in that instance.

The American Republic is in jeopardy because these laws are supported by over 80% of Americans.
The American Republic is in jeopardy because 100% of Americans supports immigration laws that work. The present law goes against basic economical interest of 80% of Americans, so they feel excused from obeying it. The respect for the law among 80% Americans is lowered.

If these laws are not enforced then Americans become slaves and slaves do not form innovation and prosperous societies.
If the nation keeps on books the laws that go upstream of basic economic interest of individuals, the only one way to enforce these laws is by enslaving these individuals. And, this does not form innovation and prosperous societies

Get it?
Get it?

You really need to take a civics 101 class. I don't mean that as an insult. I mean it as an honest suggestion.
You can look at the mirror and read your line aloud.

W
hak51

Tom2

You write:

First, if the earth is a small village, America is the most desirable home in that village, as he points out elsewhere. Secondly, it's naive only in hak51's very liberal mind to believe migration cannot be stopped and must be facilitated. In fact, it's naive to believe facilitation is natural.

You are right, facilitation is not natural. Nevertheless, it is a smart way of handling this problem.

First, let us put our national interest up front. It looks like that the economy wants more workers than Americans can deliver. Why we would not let more people to come here legally? Who, when and why decided that about 1 million of legal immigrants is good for the country?

Hey Hack, I see that you refuse to rebut my dead-accurate critique of your handiwork. I don't blame you.

CrocketsGhost

I noticed your posting. To give you some credit, I need to think for a while before answering. Plus, take care of dailly business. I will replay.

ALIPAC

At 1:30 PM EDST, July 10, 2006, the time on the board here was 3:30 AM, July 11, 2006. It confused me a little as try to keep track of posts here.

Should I be sarcastic and ask if this is one more example how attentive to details are opponents of illegal immigration?

I could tell you how to fix this but I will let W. handle this one himself.

Especially since you saw fit to be insulting and condescending.

Originally Posted by hak51

ALIPAC

At 1:30 PM EDST, July 10, 2006, the time on the board here was 3:30 AM, July 11, 2006. It confused me a little as try to keep track of posts here.

Should I be sarcastic and ask if this is one more example how attentive to details are opponents of illegal immigration?

You're the one with with control of the TIME FUNCTION so would that mean that this is another
example how attentive to details are opponents of America?
or is it VOLUNTARY STUPIDITY?

OK,

I see that time control function. If the default was set to any time zone in the USA, life would be less confusing.

Thanks for the hint.

With increased production, your husband employer would need some more experienced workers to supervise low skilled immigrant labor. Therefore, your husband would have a shot to become a foreman, for at least $15 per hour. Increased production would require more work on the maintenance of the assembly lines. Maybe, with a little training, your husband can get a job in maintenance for at least $15 per hour. With the vibrant factory in town, there will be more business in stores, more work in construction, more work in car repair shops, more schools, more taxis, and so on. If your husband is skillful enough to do more than the very basic manual labor at the assembly line, there will be more opportunities for him to find a better paid and more satisfying job.

Tell me please what is wrong with my reasoning.

This is a no brainer, the reasoning is probably correct. However, What you fail to mention is that these people have NO intention of assimilating into America and guess what that means? It means that part of her hubands "new skills " will have to include learning spanish...in America!
If you have any doubts about that go to ANY company that hires hispanics, they ALL speak practicaly nothing but spanish. Tell me why anyone should have to learn a new language to have a better paying job?
Also, tell me what part of my observasion does not hold water?


Rev. Dan