Thread: are we going to see amnesty shoved down our throats?

Originally Posted by 2ndamendsis

Not unless you allow it to be so.

.

I will never stop fighting. Never!!

Illegal Immigration is on everyones mind and we want it stopped. Plain and simple.

Everyone I talk to is opposed to amnesty, wants the borders secure and the issue resolved.

My thinking is that if the Dems try to move forward with some crap, I think the people of this country will get so fed up with this, they will rise up and revolt. I'm telling you, this is a MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR issue and it is only getting bigger.

This is a powder keg issue and it is close to blowing!

Originally Posted by Cindy

Originally Posted by TheOstrich

You need to calm down. Life will go on. You still live in the greatest country on earth.

If your A-Plan doesn't work, you go to your B-Plan. I know we have a B-Plan. And a C-Plan, if that doesn't work.

Ostrich

If illegals are granted amnesty, America will no longer be the greatest country on earth. We will become a third world nation filled with poverty and disease.

Bush claims that there are 11 to 12 million illegal immigrants in the country now. I beg to differ with him. If what I see in my city is an indication of what other cities are seeing, we have been invaded by 70 to 80 million of them. Amnesty would gurantee that the population would double with illegal's by the time they bring their families over here to live.

They don't want to say the true number of illegals so they can keep people silent, but I think those 11-12 million illegals are in my state N.J.

To me the problem is that most Americans are still sleeping, and are not aware about the illegal immigration problem. I noticed that there was no questions about illegal immigracion in the ballots, I didn't see that question in the ballots in NJ. So what does this mean? That this is not an important issue, not enough people are concerned about this situation?

May 02, 2006
Democrats Must Fight Illegal Immigration
By Brad Carson

A few years ago, I was invited to attend a dinner party in Washington, D.C. Present at the dinner were several prominent journalists, think-tank heads, and politicians, including one who is likely to run for President of the United States in 2008. Not surprisingly, given the policy orientation of the dinner guests, the conversation quickly turned to the pressing matters of the day, specifically globalization's contribution to rising economic inequality. Largely liberal, the dinner guests all expressed grave concern over the growing gap between rich and poor in the nation. But few offered any real solutions.

Rather than debate possible reforms, everyone at the dinner party uttered the familiar globalization litany. The integration of markets is irresistible, all averred. Nothing can be done to shape, much less forestall, globalization; the only debate is about what palliative policies should be enacted. For the Democrats present that night, education was the critical policy response to globalization. With better education and opportunities for retraining, young people can avoid the nitty-gritty of the tradable sector and make their careers in high value-added, nontradable services. Older workers displaced by globalization can find entirely new careers. Or so it was argued. Over the last fifteen years, this argument has been made repeatedly, and education-as-panacea has become axiomatic for Democrats.

Reflecting on that evening, I was struck by the fact that no one at the party brought up illegal immigration, which is of course one form of globalization, and its lamentable effect on income distribution. After all, most economists - even redoubtable liberals like Paul Krugman -- have concluded that the vast increase in low-skilled immigration over the last forty years has depressed the wages of low-skilled citizens. There is some debate about the magnitude of immigration's effects on the labor market, but not much about the direction of that effect.

But then again, I really shouldn't have been so surprised, as nearly everyone at the party was part of what the writer Michael Lind calls the overclass, educated at the best universities and earning hundreds of thousands of dollars each year. Their children attended private schools. Everyone had a fine retirement package and subsidized health care, and each was immune to the vicissitudes of middle-class economic life. From their cloistered positions, the solution to nearly all perceived problems - from globalization to crime -- is education, which was their own personal visa into the merit-obsessed overclass. For this group of people, immigration is not about inequality in America, but instead all about a cheap nanny, inexpensive lawn care, or proof of multicultural bona fides. Even to bring up the subject of immigration is to seem impolite, if not crass.

This is a shame, for the most important domestic policy challenge in the 21st century is found in the labor market. Alone among industrialized nations, the United States has a massive class of unskilled workers. This unskilled workforce is being buffeted by globalization-enabled labor arbitrage, the automation of blue-collar jobs, and, yes, the arrival of millions of low-skilled laborers through illegal immigration. Tragically, this class of workers is only going to grow in the future, just as the returns to schooling will become higher than ever. Let me offer an underreported but rather shocking fact: the number of young people who graduate from high school, as opposed to receiving a GED, is declining. And, as James Heckman of the University of Chicago has shown, workers with a GED have the same economic prospects as workers who drop out of high school and never get an equivalency degree. In sum, a greater proportion of American young people are low-skilled dropouts than thirty years ago. Close to 50% of these dropouts are immigrants. Now there's a problem for the overclass to consider.
America tolerates an immigration policy that adds millions of very low-skilled workers every decade, who come to this country at the expense of low-skilled native workers. Why? There is no good explanation, especially for Democrats, who like to believe that their core constituencies are the middle and lower classes of America.

To be fair, there are some Democrats who acknowledge the harmful effects of illegal immigration on the incomes of native workers - workers who are already stressed by structural changes in the economy. But few Democrats clamor to limit the supply of low-skilled foreign workers. Instead, many Democrats are pushing an increased minimum wage or card-check unionization or - again - more funding for education. They argue that these policies would have a more direct effect on the incomes of lower-skilled workers. And these policies might, in fact, be sufficient to resist the effect of illegal immigration, and, in any event, all are desirable policy and should be enacted at once. But there is no political consensus for such policies, and it is difficult to imagine that the Republican-dominated Congress would even consider them. It is irresponsible to hold on to the illusion of their possibility. Immigration reform may be a second-best solution, but the first-best is out of reach, and worse outcomes are likely if we hold on to misplaced fantasies of egalitarian social policies. Besides, the growing number of low-skilled workers, swelled by illegal immigration, makes these progressive interventions that much more expensive and, hence, unlikely.
For Democrats, fighting illegal immigration would not only be good policy, but would have the welcome effect of being good politics, too. Democrats' major political obstacle is the increasingly intractable opposition of the non-union working and middle class, exactly the groups who most fervently oppose illegal immigration. While the opponents of immigration no doubt include nativists and xenophobes, the vast majority of those who oppose illegal immigration do so on sound public policy grounds. Illegal immigration is seen rightly as a threat to their economic livelihood. So when the Republican Party offers a platform that not only comports with their social and religious beliefs, but also addresses the one economic threat that is open to government solution, is there any wonder that the working and middle classes find solace in the GOP? Democrats should find a way to bust up this alliance between economic populists and social conservatives, and make many current Republican voters choose which of these movements matters most.

By recognizing the harmful effects of illegal immigration on low-skilled citizens and by supporting legislation to prohibit untrammeled immigration, Democrats would boost the economic prospects of their core constituencies while driving a wedge into the Republican base. Democrats could even oppose illegal immigration while welcoming legal immigration, especially of the high-skilled variety. Immigration presents Democrats with an unusual opportunity to shake up the coalitions that have guided the political parties for a generation, while proving to the struggling middle and working classes that the Democratic Party is serious about reclaiming its historic role as their champion. The overclass might frown, but I would bet that millions and millions of American workers would reward the Democratic Party with their electoral gratitude.

Brad Carson is a former Democratic congressman from Oklahoma. Email: carsonmailbox-rcp@yahoo.com

Originally Posted by opinion

Bush claims that there are 11 to 12 million illegal immigrants in the country now. I beg to differ with him. If what I see in my city is an indication of what other cities are seeing, we have been invaded by 70 to 80 million of them. Amnesty would gurantee that the population would double with illegal's by the time they bring their families over here to live.

They don't want to say the true number of illegals so they can keep people silent, but I think those 11-12 million illegals are in my state N.J.[/quote]

It has got to be more than 12 million. In the past two years, I have been to Oregon, D.C., NYC and Boston.

The D.C. area, NYC and Boston are overrun by illegals. It is even worse in L.A., San Diego, Texas and Arizona, right? The BearStearns estimate of 20 million seems more on the mark, but maybe 70 million could be true.

In Fairfax, VA, there are some days where I hardly hear English.


Anyway, look at how Bush is now plugging amnesty just as he plugged the Iraq War. The man has some kind of psychological problem. He becomes fixated on something totally boneheaded and then he just will not give it up.

Bush! It's total arrogance and self righteous indignation.

Dixie

And so the end begins...our ancestors' dream destroyed not by a mushroom cloud...but by the pattering feet of latin peasants, corporate greed & whimpering politicians...

Bush eyes Democrats for help on amnesty
By Stephen Dinan
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published November 9, 2006
LINK: http://www.washingtontimes.com/national ... -5586r.htm

President Bush yesterday said he will team up with Democrats to pass an immigration bill with a guest-worker program that his own party blocked this year, and his Republican opponents predicted a bloody intraparty fight but said they cannot stop such a bill from passing.

"We will fight it, we will lose. It will go to the Senate, it will pass. The president will sign it. And it will happen quickly because that's one thing they know they can pass," said Rep. Tom Tancredo, Colorado Republican and chairman of the House Immigration Reform Caucus, who had led the opposition to a guest-worker plan. "I am absolutely horrified by this prospect, but I have to face reality."

Mr. Bush supported a bipartisan majority in the Senate this year that passed a broad immigration bill including a new worker program and citizenship rights for millions of illegal aliens. But House Republicans blocked those efforts, calling them an amnesty, and instead forced through a bill to erect nearly 700 miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Tuesday's elections removed that obstacle by turning control of the House over to Democrats.

Yesterday, in an afternoon press conference, the president said he shares Democrats' vision on immigration and will try again for a broad bill.

"There's an issue where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats," he said.

According to Reuters news agency, a spokesman for Mexican President Vicente Fox cheered Democrats' success, saying it improves chances for getting a bill done.

And Democrats said the issue's time has come.

"With alignment now in Congress and the White House, this is a unique opportunity," said Rep. Howard L. Berman, California Democrat, a senior member of the House Judiciary Committee and a leader on the issue.

He said there are a number of House Republicans who thought their enforcement approach was bad policy but good politics. He said that belief was shattered by Tuesday's elections with the loss of two Republicans in Arizona -- Randy Graf, a candidate for a seat near Tucson, and Rep. J.D. Hayworth, an incumbent from Scottsdale -- who both ran heavily on opposition to a guest-worker program.

Other losses included Rep. John Hostettler, the Indiana Republican who was chairman of the immigration subcommittee, and Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, who ran heavily on border security, hoping the issue could save him.

Republicans who backed Mr. Bush on the issue said the results are clear.

"Over the last two years, people who have been in my position on immigration have done well, and people who have been more extreme have done badly," said Rep. Chris Cannon, a Utah Republican who backs a guest-worker plan.

He said Republicans goofed by not passing a bill, because they will now be forced to accept Democratic legislation far closer to amnesty.

"If we'd done this as Republicans, we wouldn't even have the argument of pathway to citizenship," he said.

Mr. Cannon said Democrats will now get credit for solving the problem, and said Mr. Tancredo will be left with "a soapbox to pound the living daylights out of people who are scared of America changing."
There are still some big hurdles to a bill passing.

While Mr. Bush and most Democrats agree that many illegal aliens should have a regular legal status, a key sticking point is whether future workers will also have a chance at citizenship. The Senate bill allowed citizenship rights for those workers, but Mr. Bush has consistently rejected that.

Immigration also could get bogged down in 2008 presidential politics.

Mr. Cannon said he worries Democrats are trying to use the issue to bait Mr. Tancredo into a third-party candidacy to split Republican votes.

"I think the goal of the Democrats is not going to be good legislation, I think it's going to be empowering a third-party candidate," he said.

Mr. Tancredo has been considering a run for the Republican nomination in 2008, and said yesterday he has not made a decision. But he said pundits will take the wrong lesson from his party's election-night losses.

"The results of this election, although they did not occur as a result of the immigration issue, will negatively affect our cause more than anybody ever anticipated," he said.

Rep. Steve King, an Iowa Republican who wants a crackdown on illegal immigration and opposes a guest-worker plan, said Republicans didn't lose because of immigration but in spite of it.

He said Mr. Santorum came late to the issue and "it looked like it was a political position for him rather than a conviction." As for Mr. Graf, he had to fight both Democrats and Republicans, who poured money into the race trying to defeat him in the primary.

"We know where the polls are; we saw the Democrats run on border security," Mr. King said.

He vowed to redouble his efforts to fight a guest-worker bill, but said he also sees Mr. Bush signing whatever Congress sends over: "It'll be hard for him to resist a bill that will be put on his desk by a new Democratic majority."

Originally Posted by take-action-now

Obviously, the slimmy disgusting democrats won!!!....They played on the discontent of the war and the corruption of a handful of republican politicians (ironically, democrats are more corrupted then republicans but have the liberal media as allies to cover up their mishaps) to slim their way into power....

Immigration control does not have a pray at this point...

we should simply open our arms wide, pull out of our pockets more money for their education, health care and welfare services, leave our doors open so they can come on in and help themselves to our personal possessions, and present our wives and daughters for sexual assult....

Think about....those of us that voted democrat have now screwed America!!!

Yes, it may seem like I am angry I AM!!!

So W. we are begging the importance of unifying with other immigration control groups to FIGHT the war!!!....


Please tell us what can we do now???

Would a national forum/meeting with other organizations to unify be the answer???

Please help us

First off, every American citizen does have a Pray and a right of appeal.
For every computer user, or letter writer to address your concerns with every Democrat in office.
We need to demand action, with these Representatives, and if you include photo's to make your point, somuch the better.
How many of us around town, and on campus have seen things that we should of reported to authorities? We own cell phones that can take photo's, but have not added important phone numbers, to our phone lists, i.e. the INS/Homeland Security, State Police, County Sheriff, Town Police, Boder Patrol, FBI, Drug Task Force, Park Service, Poaching Hotline*, etc.

I'm from the Northwest woods area, I knew an old timer woodsman, being retired, every spring he was in the forest collecting ferns and evergreen plants, used by commercial florists worldwide. They provided him with waxed cardboard carton, and green florist paper. He would gather and bunch up his boughs, wrap them, and box and seal for shipping by air freight. He did this well into his 80's, and he told me that in the past 20 years, while in the woods, he would often come upon camps of Mexicans, 20 to 30 strong, between the ages of 16 to 50, and a few women and children. They were always eating off the land, there were no farms around for miles, they were not collecting ferns. But they were Poaching* Game. And they were growing Pot and Poppy plants, that he came across. He always carried an old Henry 22 cal. pump rifle. His last time in the woods, he never came out, his old pick-up was parked off the highway 3/4 full of plants, and he always packed it full. His body was never found. He never reported the poaching or pot/poppy fields, because of the Mexican children, he once stated. And this was before mobile phones, twenty years ago.

American's need to be Vigilent, to what is going on around them, take pictures without giving yourself away, (no flashes) and report crimes!

If there is a build-up of Mexican nationals, with no sight of farms around and no employers hiring day workers. Your guess is as good as mine, of what reason they are here. In the back of my mind, I see a Mexican Trojan Horse, waiting for the right moment in time, or call to action. !!

We need to nip this in the bud ! Right now while we still have the right to Arm ourselves, to protect our life and families, and our property, we should do so post haste. {MOD EDIT}
Is a thing well learned, when we don't know how many National Guard will be able to defend us, if that time ever comes. It's better to be prepared than not at all. Citizen soldiers are nothing new in this country.
During WW II, in France, citizens formed the Underground Resistance, and on the coast of New Jersey, armed citizens repelled landings by German Submarine crewman (which is not in history books, but local lore only) because local citizens were vigilent and armed (with hunting rifles and shotguns) in the towns of Belmar, Sea Girt, Cape May, Beach Haven, Mantoloking, Pt. Pleasant Beach. (back in the late 60's sitting around a potbelly stoves at the VFW post, or American Legion the old Veterans related these stories, to Vietnam Veterans)

What else can we do now? Form a march on Washington D.C., would 2 or 3 Million concerned citizens make a differance on Congress, maybe? Or a Thunder Run of Veteran Motorcycle Groups at the same time? And camp out on the Washington Mall for a weekend? Do you think someone would get the message? ( How about the 5th of May, 2007 ? )

When we start seeing hundreds of Illegal Nationals coming to the aid, of a countryman while he is being arrested for a crime, and our police are forced to relent and retreat, then Law and Order is lost. It's time for the National Guard. Mexico be dammed! Because if Law and Order is lost, it's a Revolucion clear and simple, a Rebellion that warrants justifiable action of Law.
If our U.S. Lawmakers, can not deal with the issues, we the people want addressed, they can be subject to recall, and booted from office.
And no one ever said, TAR & FEATHERS were obsolete !

NOW DO SOMETHING CONSTRUCTIVE !

SEMPER FIDELIS

I agree that it would be helpful to unite the efforts . If there is one big organization - it would have more weight and power than hundreds of small ones .
There is no way to win if we are so scattered .
The power is in the union

How about a 10 million person march on Washington?