July 29, 2010

Lindsey Grahamnesty Now Lindsey Grahmendment: Graham Considering Amendment To End "Birthright" Citizenship
— Ace

There is some question over whether this would require a Constitutional amendment, or whether it's a matter of interpretation such that legislation could change it. Conservatives often argue the latter, but I sort of think the Constitution says what it seems to say and so it would require a full amendment.

Which Graham is considering.

“I may introduce a constitutional amendment that changes the rules if you have a child here,” Graham said during an interview with Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren. “Birthright citizenship I think is a mistake ... We should change our Constitution and say if you come here illegally and you have a child, that child's automatically not a citizen.”

...

“People come here to have babies,” he said. “They come here to drop a child. It's called "drop and leave." To have a child in America, they cross the border, they go to the emergency room, have a child, and that child's automatically an American citizen. That shouldn't be the case. That attracts people here for all the wrong reasons.”

..

“I'm a practical guy, but when you go forward, I don't want 20 million more 20 years from now,” he said. “I want to be fair. I want to be humane. We need immigration policy, but it should be on our terms, not someone else's. I don't know how to fix it all. But I do know what makes people mad, that 12 million people came here, and there seems to be no system to deal with stopping 20 million 20 years from now.”

Graham, I'm guessing, sees this as a piece of a larger deal, a deal to get him the large-scale amnesty he wants.

But it's significant that he's thinking about conceding such a large piece to that end.

If there were serious enforcement (demonstrated over five years) plus this amendment, I could see myself persuaded to support some kind of large (but not blanket) amnesty for, say, half of the illegals here, those with the longest stays and strongest ties to the country, and say a five year special visa for the rest. But five years and that's that.


Posted by: Ace at 08:22 AM | Comments (248)
Post contains 381 words, total size 2 kb.

1 There is a simpler solution.

Just because your child is a citizen does not mean we want you, Mr and Mrs Criminal.

End parental rights over the child, put the child in foster care, then imprison the parents and deport them.


Posted by: Kristopher at July 29, 2010 08:25 AM (kCEOg)

2 O/T: a TV station in NYC is reporting that Rangel cut a deal and won't face a public hearing. Is any member of Osama Obama's protected class ever going to have to account for their lack of ethics? Apparently not.

O/T (on topic): Fuck Lindsey Graham. Big difference between "might," "will" and "is doing."

Posted by: MrScribbler at July 29, 2010 08:25 AM (Ulu3i)

3 This entire lawsuit to stop enforcement of the law is about this central concession issue.

The last amnesty carried promises of enforcement, and those promises are worse than broken... they will sue your ass to keep them broken.

We simply cannot trust the electioneering beltway on any new deals, which creates a huge problem.  I guess I can live with a 5 year proof our side will be honored, but that won't happen and we all know it.  And they would probably stop enforcement the second they got their side of the deal.

We've been lied to in a most disgusting way.

Posted by: Legendary Film Star Rick Moranis at July 29, 2010 08:26 AM (dUOK+)

4 It's a trap!

Posted by: Not at the table Carlos at July 29, 2010 08:27 AM (xO+6C)

5

You know how you deport 20 million illegals?

One at a time.

No on amnesty.  Go out the way you came and come back through proper channels.

Posted by: garrett at July 29, 2010 08:27 AM (nj4KU)

6 How about this: 1) An amendment that states children of illegals born here are illegal 2) Enforce our borders 3) Deport all illegals 4) DUMP GRAHAM

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 29, 2010 08:27 AM (9Cooa)

7
I do know what makes people mad, that 12 million people came here, and there seems to be no system to deal with stopping 20 million 20 two years from now.

FIFY

Posted by: Atomic Roach at July 29, 2010 08:28 AM (rMMMP)

8 And by deport, I mean if you are caught, you are deported and by the self-deportation of denying any and all benefits to illegals and those who employ them. We should never again compromise anything!

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 29, 2010 08:29 AM (9Cooa)

9 If there were serious enforcement (demonstrated over five years) plus this amendment

Exactly. Do what you are supposed to do first then we'll talk. These things are not part of a deal they are what is required to even start considering a deal.

Posted by: Rocks at July 29, 2010 08:29 AM (Q1lie)

10

“I may introduce a constitutional amendment that changes the rules if you have a child here,” Graham said during an interview with Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren. “Birthright citizenship I think is a mistake ... We should change our Constitution and say if you come here illegally and you have a child, that child's automatically not a citizen.”

Well, shut my mouth and call me delusional. I thought, for just a second, Graham the Sham said something I agree with.

Time for some electro-shock therapy on me nut sack....

Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 08:29 AM (OlN4e)

11 say a five year special visa for the rest

For what? There's literally no job that requires a Mexican semi-indentured peon to do it.

If you want an earning ceiling for already-fucked Americans, pass a maximum-wage law for everyone without a college diploma. Don't screw around.

Posted by: oblig. at July 29, 2010 08:30 AM (x7Ao8)

12

"We should change our Constitution and say if you come here illegally and you have a child, that child's automatically not a citizen.”

How the hell do we do this if it's illegal to ask the illegal to show their papers??

Posted by: Arizona, scratching head at July 29, 2010 08:30 AM (pLTLS)

13 For Graham, at least, this is complete BS because it will never NEVER happen; it's a smoke screen to hide his real positions.

Posted by: ParisParamus at July 29, 2010 08:31 AM (7Pu9b)

14

Concur with your plan, giving citizenship to the most deserving.  Bar those convicted of felonies (or multiple misdemeanors), those who have relied on public assistance for more than a brief period of time (or at all), known gang members, and people with civil iiues like unpaid judgments, conducting business without a license, multiple traffic infractions and speeding tickets, etc., etc. 

And they don't jump in line ahead of those pursuing citizenship the right way.

Posted by: buzz at July 29, 2010 08:31 AM (kwhut)

15

How the hell do we do this if it's illegal to ask the illegal to show their papers??

We're gonna rely on their sacred honor to come forward and 'fess up.

Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 08:32 AM (OlN4e)

16

If there were serious enforcement (demonstrated over five years) plus this amendment, I could see myself persuaded to support some kind of large (but not blanket) amnesty for, say, half of the illegals here, those with the longest stays and strongest ties to the country, and say a five year special visa for the rest. But five years and that's that

yeah i am fine with that. I would also say that any illegal alien here who has committed a crime, felony or misdemenor(with the exception of being here illegally of course), is excluded from Amensty or a Visa.

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 08:32 AM (wuv1c)

17 Lindsey's vagina has been depressed.  Now it's getting better.  Baby steps, people, baby steps.....

Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 29, 2010 08:32 AM (UOM48)

18
Why do I feel like I'm being jerked off?

Posted by: Alpha & Omega Man at July 29, 2010 08:34 AM (uFokq)

19 The problem, Ace, is that we all know Graham will support Amnesty with the promise of these programs to be implemented at a later date, after the amnesty.

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 08:35 AM (wuv1c)

20 'Bout time someone addressed the mongrel problem.

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 08:35 AM (RkRxq)

21 When the Conservatives take back both houses, they should keep locked Graham in a gimp box under the Speakers chair and take him out to slap around once a week, just for giggles.

Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 08:36 AM (OlN4e)

22 At least Lindsey isn't using the reptilian part of his brain. 

Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 29, 2010 08:36 AM (UOM48)

23 It's all so simple to anyone who isn't a member of Congress, sitting in the White House/visiting sleazy TV shows/golfing or committed to the destruction of this nation (three interchangeable categories):

The United States of America has laws intended to protect our borders.

Enforce them.

If we took that simple, logical step, far fewer children-of-illegals would be born here.

Yes, the amendment that confers this abused right should be repealed. Should have been done decades ago. But if we closed the fucking borders to anyone who isn't eligible to cross them, that would at least be a start.

Graham should go back to whatever rock he crawled out of and STFU. I hate every iota of that cracka.

Posted by: MrScribbler at July 29, 2010 08:36 AM (Ulu3i)

24

Nearly 5k Americans killed each day by illegals.

What's the rush.

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 08:36 AM (RkRxq)

25 Lindsey Graham is a part of the Rebel Alliance and a traitor! Take him away!

Posted by: Dark Helmet at July 29, 2010 08:37 AM (QKKT0)

26
Why do I feel like someone is trying to Stupaktm me?


Posted by: Alpha & Omega Man at July 29, 2010 08:37 AM (uFokq)

27

Nearly 5k Americans killed each day by illegals.

What's the rush.

that can't be true, that would be 1.825 million people

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 08:39 AM (wuv1c)

28 Enforcement first, constitutional amendment/limited amnesty second. And build a real, solid, nonvirtual wall!

Posted by: joncelli at July 29, 2010 08:39 AM (RD7QR)

29 So you've got someone who has been here for, say, 10 years -- making about $20K under the table, sending what he could back to Michoacan....how is this person going to make up his $30,000 under-contribution to Social Security?

And if he doesn't, why should he get that break when someone who came in the front door and played by the rules has paid that much in?

Posted by: cthulhu at July 29, 2010 08:40 AM (/0IOT)

30 >>>For what? There's literally no job that requires a Mexican semi-indentured peon to do it. To allow people time to wrap up, make plans, and go home. You have to watch the hard-core stuff which will never fly without some amelioration. People are very wishy-washy and the polls show this. YES, they agree, the illegals should not be here, but when you ask if they favor a mass deportation, they say NO. You have to appreciate that wishy-washy crap the public does and craft something they can get behind, something that appeases that soft-hearted tendency. Just repeating "They all must go home!" isn't going to carry that 51%. Every time the question is put to them in those terms they recoil.

Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 08:41 AM (KUUXH)

31

Actualy, there is a much simpler way to do this, and it can be done by law.

Reintroduce the idea that there are NO DUAL CITIZENS when it comes to US Citizenship.  If you are US, you are nothing else.

Then DEPORT all those parents... when they take their US Citizen kid with them, they'll have all kinds of problems in their home countries... and if the kid takes citizenship in that other country to go to school and such? They give up their US citizenship.

Posted by: Romeo13 at July 29, 2010 08:41 AM (H+oXM)

32

So you've got someone who has been here for, say, 10 years -- making about $20K under the table, sending what he could back to Michoacan....how is this person going to make up his $30,000 under-contribution to Social Security?

And if he doesn't, why should he get that break when someone who came in the front door and played by the rules has paid that much in?

Simple. Because the government ISNT going to enforce the law, ever. They just aren't.  Those people ARE going to become citizens, it is just a matter of time. So we should probably start trying to focus on the best possible deal we can get. Ending anchor babies and border enforcement would probably be all we are going to get.

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 08:42 AM (wuv1c)

33 >>>The problem, Ace, is that we all know Graham will support Amnesty with the promise of these programs to be implemented at a later date, after the amnesty. True, true... But we can insist on the order of things.

Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 08:42 AM (KUUXH)

34 This is all well and good, but my lawn isn't going to mow itself.

Posted by: Cicero at July 29, 2010 08:42 AM (QKKT0)

35

>>>The problem, Ace, is that we all know Graham will support Amnesty with the promise of these programs to be implemented at a later date, after the amnesty.

True, true... But we can insist on the order of things.

Obama will gladly pay Lindsay tomorrow for a cheeseburger today.

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 08:42 AM (wuv1c)

36 They have a rule in hospitals that the doctor must call the police if they suspect someone has been abused.

Make a new rule that the doc must call ICE if they suspect someones illegal. If we deport the parents the minute the kid is born this crap will stop.

Posted by: Buzzsaw at July 29, 2010 08:43 AM (tf9Ne)

37 >>>So you've got someone who has been here for, say, 10 years -- making about $20K under the table, sending what he could back to Michoacan....how is this person going to make up his $30,000 under-contribution to Social Security? This is a very important point and we can never lose sight of it. We cannot make SS more insolvent by bestowing normal benefits on those who haven't contributed properly. The tax rate for amnestied workers on payroll taxes would have to have a kicker to it, a fairly big one, to overcome this.

Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 08:43 AM (KUUXH)

38

Ok, but how do we know he's really serious about this if we don't have video of him choking a coyote on the Arizona border?

Rotflmao.. jesus, just how stupid does Lindsey think we are, anyway?

Posted by: StuckOnStupid at July 29, 2010 08:44 AM (e8T35)

39

Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 01:41 PM (KUUXH)

What will work IMO is to actualy enforce current law.  Check EVERYONEs status if they have interaction with the cops... check EVERYONE applying for a job...  give the SSN bogus numbers being used to ICE...

I think they'd self deport over time.

Posted by: Romeo13 at July 29, 2010 08:44 AM (H+oXM)

40 35 This is all well and good, but my lawn isn't going to mow itself. Posted by: Cicero at July 29, 2010 01:42 PM (QKKT0) Get a goat. Fertilizes and trims the lawn all at once. Win/win.

Posted by: joncelli at July 29, 2010 08:44 AM (RD7QR)

41 “I may introduce a constitutional amendment that changes the rules if you have a child here,” Graham said during an interview with Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren. “Birthright citizenship I think is a mistake ... We should change our Constitution and say if you come here illegally and you have a child, that child's automatically not a citizen.”

Likewise, I may one day get a life - doesn't mean I will.  Grahamnstry is shaking this carrot stick for his amnesty deal.  Probably won't be enforced and/or the courts will strike it down on humanitarian grounds.  It's a fucking trap.  Besides, even if he did introduce this Constitutional Amendment, what are the odds it will be passed by 2/3rds of Congress and the States? 

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 29, 2010 08:45 AM (9hSKh)

42 Glad to see you're a little more practical and coincidentally, libertarian on this issue Ace, regarding your "If... plus..." statement. I agree, demonstrated security first.

Posted by: Stan at July 29, 2010 08:45 AM (9rQOT)

43 Build the Wall
Take their Cars
Deport them All
To fucking Mars

Posted by: Brian72 at July 29, 2010 08:45 AM (GNBk5)

44 "I may introduce a constitutional amendment that changes the rules if you have a child here," Graham said...

Ahahaha! Good one, Lindsey. Now make sure you end your set with "and don't forget to try the veal," and you'll be golden.

BTW, who knew Graham was such a bigot?

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at July 29, 2010 08:45 AM (swuwV)

45 If the Irish want work, they can dig me another sub-way

Posted by: Linsdey Graham at July 29, 2010 08:45 AM (e8YaH)

46 If there were serious enforcement (demonstrated over five years) plus this amendment, I could see myself persuaded to support some kind of large (but not blanket) amnesty for, say, half of the illegals here, those with the longest stays and strongest ties to the country, and say a five year special visa for the rest. But five years and that's that.

I would be even a little harsher. (Or at least start bargaining there)
For your upper half over the age of 18, with no brushes with the law beyond an infraction. Permanent resident with no chance of Citizenship. Less than 18, Citizenship upon graduation from High School. 

Felons, immediate deportation.

All the rest, 2 years, plenty of time to plan.

Those who knowingly disrespected our laws, and our sovereignty, should not be part of making those laws, nor part of that sovereignty. If they think that is too harsh, they can affirm their respect for our laws by returning to their country and immigrating legally, in which case their time gainfully employed in the US would be to their benefit, and their status while here would not be held against them.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at July 29, 2010 08:46 AM (0q2P7)

47 Let me guess, John McCain is on board with this.

Posted by: Not at the table Carlos at July 29, 2010 08:46 AM (xO+6C)

48 >>>Glad to see you're a little more practical and coincidentally, libertarian on this issue Ace Just curious -- how is this "libertarian"? Libertarians think people have the right to immigrate where they wish without respect to the law?

Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 08:46 AM (KUUXH)

49

Something that will never happen, but would help solve the problem is enforcement of penalties against business. Why can't we have prohibitive fines against businesses that hire illegals.

I have to check documents for I-9s whenever we hire people. We are federally required to do so.

 

If you put a massive fine on each illegal hired, companies would stop hiring them. No jobs = no reason to stay in america.

 

I think we often let big, and small, business off the hook in this illegal immigration issue.

The most powerful groups are aligned for illegal aliens. The Catholic and Evangelical Churches, Unions, Leftists, Big and Small Businesses, and Foreign governments.

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 08:46 AM (wuv1c)

50 #45  BTW, who knew Graham was such a bigot?

He's got a reptilian brain.

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 29, 2010 08:46 AM (9hSKh)

51

For Graham, at least, this is complete BS because it will never NEVER happen; it's a smoke screen to hide his real positions.

It also gives the MFM a huge target for their "Republicans are racists" claim.

Posted by: Ed Anger at July 29, 2010 08:47 AM (7+pP9)

52 As I said earlier, this is BS rhetoric for Grahamnasty in an effort to get another damn amnesty bill going when he knows that there is absolutely no support for this among the rank and file of either party.

He can squeak on about a constitutional amendment because he knows it would have zero chance of approval. Come 2/3 of both houses and the States?  Does he think we are damn stupid?

As for whether of not it is needed I don't think so. The current anchor baby stuff is based on a bad interpretation by the immigration people of the Wong Kim Ark case.  In that case the court ruled on the children of LEGAL immigrants born in this country. That fits the portion of the 14th amendment referring to "subject to the jurisdiction thereof". The only "jurisdiction" that illegal migrants have is the ability to be deported.

The fact is that the court has NEVER ruled directly on the anchor baby scheme. Perhaps congress can pass a law and get a ruling.

Posted by: Vic at July 29, 2010 08:47 AM (/jbAw)

53 Someone tell me, please just what's so damn wrong with enforcing EXISTING law as applied to illegal immigrants?

  Presuming someone actually does their job of enforcement, the resulting improvement is only addressing the result. The root cause here is Mexico's inability or unwillingness to work to improve the living standards of it's citizens. Continued failure will result in the problem either remaining or worsening
 
 In light of that, border control and strict enforcement can help to alleviate the problem, best that we can hope for, for now. Sure as shit amnesty aint the way to go..

Posted by: irongrampa at July 29, 2010 08:47 AM (ud5dN)

54 Make a new rule that the doc must call ICE if they suspect someones illegal. If we deport the parents the minute the kid is born this crap will stop. Posted by: Buzzsaw at July 29, 2010 01:43 PM (tf9Ne) Some federal judge would KO that in an Arizona Minute

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 29, 2010 08:47 AM (0GFWk)

55 EH?? is this fuckstick up for election? 

Posted by: dananjcon at July 29, 2010 08:47 AM (pr+up)

56 We have tens of millions coming through the US on valid visas every year.  There is no way to ever seal this nation so that we don't have illegals in large numbers, since it only take s a small percentage of those on tourist visas or student visas to decide that they don't want to leave.

What this means is that the US will always have to deal with large numbers of illegals here.  There is no stopping that.  That means that the only action that is of any real value is INTERIOR ENFORCEMENT.  If we are not willing to do it, now, then we will never do it and it will be one shamnesty after another until this nation is dead.  But, Grahamnesty and all the idiots are telling us how we just can't possibly do interior enforcement, now.  That is unacceptable.

Grahamnesty is an idiot and a traitor.  He should be deported to Mexico, himself ... in a dress.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 29, 2010 08:48 AM (Qp4DT)

57 Get a goat. Fertilizes and trims the lawn all at once. Win/win.

Posted by: joncelli at July 29, 2010 01:44 PM (RD7QR)

Goat + leaf blower = comedy gold big trouble

Posted by: Cicero at July 29, 2010 08:48 AM (QKKT0)

58 My gut feel is no amnesty, period. More realistically, close the border, enforce first, then we'll talk; but no concessions until we've done that for a period of time. Politically, something like Ace mentions as a template may be the best we are going to be able to do.

Posted by: RM at July 29, 2010 08:48 AM (GkYyh)

59 I'm going to be re-elected by a wide margin on 2014.  You tea bag people have short memories.

Posted by: Linsdey Graham at July 29, 2010 08:49 AM (e8YaH)

60 If there were serious enforcement (demonstrated over five years) plus this amendment, I could see myself persuaded to support some kind of large (but not blanket) amnesty for, say, half of the illegals here

Never.  This is a recipe for national death.  Period.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 29, 2010 08:49 AM (Qp4DT)

61 No no no, an amendment to deport illegals and their thereby illegal children will not fly on with my side. "Inhumane for those little urchins to be turned back to whatever impoverished country they hail from."

Now, if Miss Lindsey were pushing to sayyyyyy... abort the offspring... I'm sure the we would jump on the chance. In the name of population control and all.

Do it for the children planet!

Posted by: John Holdren at July 29, 2010 08:49 AM (mtAxB)

62 Yeah, I just wish he was up for election this year. He would be out like a light.

Posted by: Vic at July 29, 2010 08:49 AM (/jbAw)

63

"how do we know he's really serious about this if we don't have video of him choking a coyote on the Arizona border?"

And he's gotta be choking the coyote with a Sidewinder. A live one.

Posted by: Joanie (Oven Gloves) at July 29, 2010 08:50 AM (HaYO4)

64 You have to appreciate that wishy-washy crap the public does and craft something they can get behind, something that appeases that soft-hearted tendency.

Just repeating "They all must go home!" isn't going to carry that 51%. Every time the question is put to them in those terms they recoil.


Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 01:41 PM (KUUXH)

That depends, Ace. 5 years ago here in Arkansas I never saw a Mexican, now we're ass deep in them. I don't mean Hispanic Americans, I mean non-English speaking wet backs. We just got a petition signed (77,000+ signatures required) to put a constitutional amendment on next Septembers ballot that forces anyone who wants any kind of government benefits to prove citizenship. Applies to everyone except in cases of emergency and those under 14 yoa. People here are fed up.

Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 08:50 AM (OlN4e)

65

Simple. Because the government ISNT going to enforce the law, ever. They just aren't.  Those people ARE going to become citizens, it is just a matter of time. So we should probably start trying to focus on the best possible deal we can get. Ending anchor babies and border enforcement would probably be all we are going to get.

Ending anchor babies is a moot point anyway, if everytime we turn around were waving a magic wand and granting illegals citizenship in huge waves.  It's also a moot point if we don't enforce our own laws to deal with those that are here illegally.  What difference does it make if you are an illegal alien if there are no consequences for it to begin with?

As far as border enforcement, that's bullshit of the highest order I'm afraid.  We've been promised border enforcement for decades now, and they've barely lifted a finger.  Sure, they might pass something that says they'll start protecting the border, but we all know it's going to be crap.  Much like this "paygo" bullshit, they'll just ignore it after they pass it.

 

Posted by: StuckOnStupid at July 29, 2010 08:50 AM (e8T35)

66 Why can't all latino immigrants be like Cubans? They seem to make great Americans

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 08:50 AM (wuv1c)

67 56 EH?? is this fuckstick up for election?

2012.  Which is the current leading year for the end of the world, go figure.

/In the end, there will be only chaos.


Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 29, 2010 08:50 AM (9hSKh)

68 If there were serious enforcement (demonstrated over five years) plus this amendment, I could see myself persuaded to support some kind of large (but not blanket) amnesty for, say, half of the illegals here, those with the longest stays and strongest ties to the country, and say a five year special visa for the rest. But five years and that's that.

No one who broke the law to come here or to stay here should be tolerated.

Another amnesty is just going to start the flood again, as they gamble on another one after that.

Posted by: Rob Crawford at July 29, 2010 08:51 AM (ZJ/un)

69

And he's gotta be choking the coyote with a Sidewinder. A live one.

Call me Lindsey, one more time.. I dare you..

rotflmao

Posted by: StuckOnStupid at July 29, 2010 08:51 AM (e8T35)

70 >>>As I said earlier, this is BS rhetoric for Grahamnasty in an effort to get another damn amnesty bill going when he knows that there is absolutely no support for this among the rank and file of either party. Are you sure? I am thinking Overton Window. >>>He can squeak on about a constitutional amendment because he knows it would have zero chance of approval. Come 2/3 of both houses and the States? Does he think we are damn stupid? It's 3/4ths of the states, and I do think we could get that... As for 2/3rds in Congress -- tougher, yes, I admit, but don't forget about all that pressure, and how Democrats in swingy districts can cave. I think this is closer than you do. And I repeat, Overton Window. I see a big thing here that this is now being discussed, and not just discussed, but by someone on the Grahamnesty side of things.

Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 08:51 AM (KUUXH)

71 Of course we should deport illegal aliens!  We must fight the reptiods in every way possible!

Posted by: David Icke at July 29, 2010 08:52 AM (IkEhE)

72 >>>No one who broke the law to come here or to stay here should be tolerated. The public's wishy-washy, indecisive, soft-hearted nature makes me think this is where a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down.

Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 08:53 AM (KUUXH)

73 'Bout time someone addressed the mongrel problem.
( snip )
Nearly 5k Americans killed each day by illegals.
( snip )
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber



Screw off, Bigot. Could you, like, not pretend to be on our side?

( BTW, 5000 x 365 = 1.825 Million. Get some outside help before typing the numbers on your keyboard  )

Posted by: Kristopher at July 29, 2010 08:53 AM (kCEOg)

74 Buzzsaw: "Make a new rule that the doc must call ICE if they suspect someones illegal..."

I know there are hospitals in border states where that would pretty much empty the wards.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at July 29, 2010 08:53 AM (swuwV)

75

Any importation of the poorest, sickest and dumbest rimmigrants from the socialist third world will result in a permanent demographic swing toward socialism.  Any amnesty will mean that we will never be on the winning side of an election again in our lifetimes.  Or more likely, there will be no candidates we can support running for elections in our lifetimes.

Amnesty is the very last thing America will do.

Posted by: Truman North at July 29, 2010 08:53 AM (e8YaH)

76 Damn, it's 2014 that Grahamnasty's up for reelection.

The National Nightmare continues...

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at July 29, 2010 08:54 AM (9hSKh)

77 Correction to # 65 Novembers ballot.

Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 08:54 AM (OlN4e)

78 You see what you see; I see deporting all illegals--gradually, with no Grand Drama, and with most of them moving back to Wherever when faced with eventual deportation.

Otherwise this nation and culture and economy cease to exist as we've known them ( as we've known America ) and this country becomes nothing more than a mall

Posted by: SantaRosaStan, born in the USA at July 29, 2010 08:54 AM (JrRME)

79 Hey, that mongrel line always did great when my pastor used it to describe the Jews....

Posted by: Barack Obama at July 29, 2010 08:54 AM (VmtE9)

80 EH?? is this fuckstick up for election?

2012.  Which is the current leading year for the end of the world, go figure.

Actually 2014 unless we have a benign act of God.

Posted by: Vic at July 29, 2010 08:54 AM (/jbAw)

81 If McCain supports it then I think it's a ploy by Graham to help him get re-elected.

Posted by: Not at the table Carlos at July 29, 2010 08:54 AM (xO+6C)

82 >>Libertarians think people have the right to immigrate where they wish without respect to the law?

Depends on which libertarians you talk to. Some see immigration policy as arbitrary restrictions on freedom of movement, others see it as a necessary ingredient of the rule of law.  Ideally, we wouldn't need the restrictions, but you understand why we do.

I see your position as more libertarian than the strict conservative position, which is rarely explicit other than "border security." Obviously we will need some kind of comprehensive reform (after demonstrated security) that tends to be a little more generous to immigrants than the status quo, or we'll be back where we started in 20 years.



Posted by: Stan at July 29, 2010 08:55 AM (9rQOT)

83 Just as long as we don't let in any more Irish, they eat their own babies you know.

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 08:55 AM (wuv1c)

84 This is Grahmnesty supporting something that won't happen any time soon in order to cover what he actually want to do now.

Posted by: LiveFreeOrDie at July 29, 2010 08:55 AM (sYHKJ)

85

BTW,

Enjoying the commentary that so far has not included calling Ace a squish or turncoat for having put something on the table for discussion.

Posted by: RM at July 29, 2010 08:55 AM (GkYyh)

86

Everyone old enough to remember the attempt to pass the Equal Rights Amendment knows this is a joke.

Posted by: Ed Anger at July 29, 2010 08:56 AM (7+pP9)

87
In the meantime...

licenses for illegals
voting rights for illegals
free tuition for illegals
free health care for illegals
free housing for illegals

MAYBE we should put an end to this nonsense first and then you can jerk us off with fantasies about amending the Constitution.

Posted by: Alpha & Omega Man at July 29, 2010 08:56 AM (uFokq)

88 3 presidents in the past have deported illegals. Google operation wetback.

Posted by: Waylon at July 29, 2010 08:56 AM (0Md1Q)

89 This is just a diversion on the Part of Lindsey. He has not support for this and it will go no where. Nothing to see here, keeping moving.

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 29, 2010 08:57 AM (0GFWk)

90

As much as I'd like to see mass deportation, or a credible threat for this to happen, I agree that it is impractical, if not impossible.

I truly believe that 70-80% of the problems associated with illegal immigration can be fixed (ameliorated, actually) with a serious re-vamping of the taxation system in the US.

A flat tax on consumption, food included, will force those who do not put into the system now, do so. The huge swaths of immigrants simply take out of the system and do not put anything in. Is this not the main reason that states and municipalities are so underfunded?

This should also serve to lower the burden on people like us who disproportionately shoulder the responsibility of keeping America afloat.

If the cost of being here is too high for them as a result of this, they will self-deport.

This would be a huge step in the right direction and also have the benefit of them assimilation more. They are no longer in the shadows, keeping to themselves.

 

As for the criminallly inclined, throw -em out just like any other deportation subject.

Posted by: Gunslinger at July 29, 2010 08:57 AM (Zi+FQ)

91 If they came here illegally they're criminals. Round em up and send them home. Nothing less. I don't care what ties they have. Polanski probably has lots of ties in Europe. He stills deserves to be cornholed to death in a California prison. When we give a little to the left we lose. When we neglect part of the rule of law the whole thing goes. You can't continue to reward criminals. I don't want to hear about political realities. I don't care how great their dishwashing job is. Round em up and send them home. If the government won't the people will. If the government doesn't enforce rule of law the land will be lawless. There is no middle ground.

Posted by: ChicagoJedi at July 29, 2010 08:57 AM (WZFkG)

92 Actually we do need real immigration reform so I will post my plan again:

Yes we need immigration reform, but NOT what has been rolled out the last half dozen times. Every bill that has come out since the first major rewrite in 1965 has basically been amnesty and open invitation for illegals to flood across the border.

We are no longer the country of the 19th century with vast open areas in the West. Our cities are overcrowded shit holes run by corrupt communist hacks AND there is no longer a vast area open for the inhabitants to flee to and take up farming.

This is not to mention that we have entire towns in CA with a population > 20,000 in which none of the citizens speak English.  The current crew of "immigrants" do not appear to desire to assimilate and the current crowd of liberals do not think they should. The schools have gone from teaching America as a mixing pot to America as a salad bowl where "diversity" is celebrated and heritage counts for all, unless you have a European heritage then you are a racist.

Yes, there are a lot of things that need to be done to "fix" our immigration laws.  The first one of these should be to repeal that POS of Amnesty Round I that got us where we are today.

We need immigration law that does the following AND that is enforced:

1. Eliminate the BS anchor baby interpretation by providing a definition of what the term “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” means, which is not dashing across the border to deliver a baby.  Personally, I would require that at least one of the parents of any child born in the U.S. be a citizen before that child was eligible for “birthright” citizenship. If not, then the child would have to undergo naturalization.

2. Provide a reliable means for employers to check the status of employees.

3. Provide severe punishments for knowingly hiring illegals (or reckless disregard). That punishment should include jail time for repeat violations.  

4. Eliminate ALL benefits for illegals including schools for children.

5. Rewrite legal immigration to allow in immigrants with a desirable education and/or skill set and arrange the waiting list to have the most skilled/educated at the top of the list. (Australian system) Also include a check for communicable diseases (as we did in the past) and provide for immunization. Immigrants from countries on the list of terror support need not apply.

6. For groups that already have large populations in the U.S. who have not assimilated, reduce the allowable numbers until they do (eliminate whole towns that do not speak English)

7. Provide severe penalties for mules.

8. Provide the death penalty for people involved in sex slavery.

9. Eliminate all forms of asylum. That system has been abused to the point of making it a joke. Any true case that needs to be let in should be a case by case special act passed by congress. Get them on record.

10. Immigrants who become involved in any serious crime prior to becoming a citizen should be deported back to their home country.

11. Absolutely no dual citizenship allowed.

Posted by: Vic at July 29, 2010 08:57 AM (/jbAw)

93 Why is Ace such a squishy turncoat?

Posted by: Ed Anger at July 29, 2010 08:57 AM (7+pP9)

94 How did we ever get into a position where we are negotiating the law? Here's another suggestion, for every illegal who is granted amnesty, as much as it may piss us off it's going to happen in one form or another, the country where that person comes from loses 5 slots for legal immigrants. Instead of us fighting to get these people to leave let's put the onus on them and their original country. Slam the border shut, enforce the current law, get rid of anchor babies and institute this policy of taking away legal immigrant slots from offending countries. Hey Mexico, you want us to keep these 10 million illegals? Ok, but you now lose 50 million legal slots which means the next legal immigrant the US will accept from Mexico will be in about 2200. That ought to make them pucker down in Mexico City.

Posted by: JackStraw at July 29, 2010 08:58 AM (VW9/y)

95 The Constitution should be interpreted as close to the text as possible. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
is pretty clear.   The issue is really the "anchor baby" problem - that is strictly statutory.  Eliminate family reunification (my preference) or modify so that only parents with legal status at the time of birth are eligible.  The child could be left with a guardian in the US or taken home to reenter when an adult.  There will be howling about the cruelty and inhumanity of forcing people to make unpleasant decisions.

Posted by: deadman at July 29, 2010 08:58 AM (dvEtf)

96 I could see myself persuaded to support some kind of large (but not blanket) amnesty for, say, half of the illegals here, those with the longest stays and strongest ties to the country, and say a five year special visa for the rest.

Yeah, a lot of us are not in favor of "comprehensive" immigration reform just because we know it's a scam.  If the borders are secure (i.e., no massive influx after the law's passed) and there's an ongoing commitment to enforcement, then we can talk about comprehensive reform.  I still prefer the idea of bringing people in who intend to be citizens rather than guest worker programs that have failed in Europe, but the ruling class needs to play straight with us.

Posted by: AmishDude at July 29, 2010 08:58 AM (T0NGe)

97
Meanwhile...

the Labor Secretary, Linda douche bag Solis, is making sure illegals earn their fair wages.

I don't remember ANY Republicans, let alone Graham, saying anything about that.

Posted by: Alpha & Omega Man at July 29, 2010 08:58 AM (uFokq)

98

From the department of stupid headlines:

http://tinyurl.com/2ftwcow

Hello...?  French?

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 08:58 AM (RkRxq)

99 We have tens of millions coming through the US on valid visas every year.  There is no way to ever seal this nation so that we don't have illegals in large numbers, since it only take s a small percentage of those on tourist visas or student visas to decide that they don't want to leave.

Visas expire, you know. If we adopted a system half as effective as, say, Japan's -- when I was there, they stapled a little slip to your passport that had to be turned in the day you left. I'm told they do follow up on people who don't do as ordered. They also were most insistent on knowing where you were going to be staying, and for how long -- people who overstay their welcome would be booted out.

As they should be.

A foreign friend who has been here legally for years is facing seventeen kinds of grief from ICE while renewing her work permit. She has violated no laws and has done everything one could reasonably expect from from a legal resident, but the immigration nazis are making her life hell.

When I was growing up in California, I remember annual radio messages telling every alien to report and register or face penalties and be liable to arrest. A good system, one we should return to. Immediately.

Posted by: MrScribbler at July 29, 2010 08:59 AM (Ulu3i)

100
  I tend to agree with the self-deportation argument--do you recall the stories of illegals packing and moving when SB1070 was on the horizon?  I'd wager if enforcement only was implemented, the illegal population would dwindle greatly.

Posted by: irongrampa at July 29, 2010 08:59 AM (ud5dN)

101 >>>Everyone old enough to remember the attempt to pass the Equal Rights Amendment knows this is a joke. But the ERA was never really all that popular, you know. Like a quarter of the states are reliably liberal. That means that amendment wise things are more doable for US than for them, as we have around the three quarters to begin with (or almost, I mean, spitting distance).

Posted by: Ace at July 29, 2010 09:00 AM (KUUXH)

102 Kratos (Ghost of Sparta): "He's [Lindsey Grahamnesty] got a reptilian brain."

He wishes! I suggest you rescind your offense, Sir!

Posted by: Reptile at July 29, 2010 09:00 AM (swuwV)

103 If we just classified all illegals as mongrels, would that help?

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 09:00 AM (RkRxq)

104
Remember when Obama said he's committed to nuclear energy and building more nuclear power plants?

This is the same jerkoff maneuver.

These cocksuckers in Washington think we're fucking stupid.

Posted by: Alpha & Omega Man at July 29, 2010 09:00 AM (uFokq)

105 'Bout time someone...
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber

"mongrel
2. taboo  a person of mixed race "

I happen to be a mongrel asshole.
You can take that shit and go sell it at stormfront.


Posted by: MikeTheMoose at July 29, 2010 09:00 AM (0q2P7)

106 Why is Ace such a squishy turncoat?

Posted by: Ed Anger at July 29, 2010 01:57 PM (7+pP9)


Someone saw him eat a piece of brie once. It was only on a dare and he immediately washed it down with Valu-Rite but people have long memories.

Posted by: Rocks at July 29, 2010 09:00 AM (Q1lie)

107


 Not to mention the slap in the face to those that followed the procedure to come here. Gotta really make THEM feel top notch.

Posted by: irongrampa at July 29, 2010 09:01 AM (ud5dN)

108 Perhaps Barry's dominant reptilian brain is what allows him to so deftly snatch flies out of mid-air? He also tends to vacation in spots known for their plentiful flying insects (especially those juicy Maine mosquitoes, mmm mm mm...).

Posted by: Lincolntf at July 29, 2010 09:02 AM (+O8yf)

109

I think we on the right need to resign ourselves on some of these issues.

If it isn't clear to you that the government, repbublican, democrat, green, libertarian. etc won't enforce border law at this point then you are dense.

In an ideal world, our government would enforce the laws on the books. I think we all agree on that.

But it will never happen. The most powerful interests on the right the religious, big and small businesses, etc and the most powers interests on the left, the unions, academics, etc. all support non enforecement or amnesty.

We can't beat those groups. We simply can't.. The best we can do is try to prevent future immigration problems.

The best we can hope for, i think, is deportation of the crimnal elements, sealing up the boarder, ending anchor babies, offering citizenship to those who have been living here for 7 or so years, and visas to those who wish to remain here. Then increasing our H1-B(i think) visas, which are for skilled and educated immigrants.

America needs immigrants, that is part of our strength. In 50 years when Europe is old and dying and China has 25% more men that women, we will be a strong a vibrant nation with a middle aged to young population.

I know comprimise sucks, especially on principles you hold dearly, but we will never get 100 percent of what we want on this issue.

Just look at the history of immigration in this country, the amnesty always wins out, we just need to do what we can to prevent the next one.

 

in my humble opinion

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:02 AM (wuv1c)

110 Cut your own fucking lawn ( or zero-scape it )

Do your own fucking landscaping ( or zero-scape it

Clean your own fucking house

Don't go out to dinner as often ( pick places which use kids, not illegals )

Avoid large hotels / motels ( see above  )

Or, just sit back and let this nation be overrun by non-citizens who will turn it into a combination of Juarez,  Kowloon, Mumbai, San Salvador, and Manilla


Posted by: SantaRosaStan, born in the USA at July 29, 2010 09:02 AM (JrRME)

111 Complete and total bullshit. An ammendment is impossible for one thing. Second, Lindsey is a ballsack. This is the proposal he will negotiate away for amnesty. He would accept empty enforcement promises in it's place.

Posted by: runninrebel at July 29, 2010 09:02 AM (IbnFz)

112 Obama called all blacks, and then all whites, 'mongrels' this morning

Posted by: Truman North at July 29, 2010 09:03 AM (e8YaH)

113

If there were serious enforcement (demonstrated over five years) plus this amendment, I could see myself persuaded to support some kind of large (but not blanket) amnesty for, say, half of the illegals here, those with the longest stays and strongest ties to the country, and say a five year special visa for the rest. But five years and that's that.

It has more complications than conservative principles have, to my knowledge, openly acknowledged.

Offhand, with more consideration needed, my powerless assessment would be  that zero consideration of amnesty be given to anyone here illegally.

Posted by: dum blond at July 29, 2010 09:04 AM (gbCNS)

114 Freekin' italic thingy didn't work for me. Again.

The first 'graf of my 1:59 post was copied from progressoverpeace.

Posted by: MrScribbler at July 29, 2010 09:04 AM (Ulu3i)

115 111 Cut your own fucking lawn ( or zero-scape it )

Do your own fucking landscaping ( or zero-scape it

Clean your own fucking house

Don't go out to dinner as often ( pick places which use kids, not illegals )

Avoid large hotels / motels ( see above  )

Or, just sit back and let this nation be overrun by non-citizens who will turn it into a combination of Juarez,  Kowloon, Mumbai, San Salvador, and Manilla


Posted by: SantaRosaStan, born in the USA at July 29, 2010 02:02 PM (JrRME)

+1, and a fukkin'-A on top.

Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 09:04 AM (OlN4e)

116 I happen to be a mongrel asshole.
You can take that shit and go sell it at stormfront.


Posted by: MikeTheMoose at July 29, 2010 02:00 PM (0q2P7)

Mongrel and asshole?

I think they make a cream for that.

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 09:04 AM (RkRxq)

117 End the dang Birthright.

Posted by: Lindsay Graham at July 29, 2010 09:05 AM (pr+up)

118 From the angry posts, it sounds like a few overly-sensitive types didn't hear my "mongrel" comment on the View today....

Posted by: Barack Obama at July 29, 2010 09:05 AM (VmtE9)

119 I happen to be a mongrel asshole.
You can take that shit and go sell it at stormfront.


Posted by: MikeTheMoose at July 29, 2010 02:00 PM (0q2P7)

The "mongrel" stuff is a play on what The Precedent just said on the View.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 29, 2010 09:05 AM (Qp4DT)

120 Then increasing our H1-B(i think) visas, which are for skilled and educated immigrants.

There's a limit?  Really?  I'm in academia and I don't see it.

Why don't we have a quota of foreign-born law school students?  Brits, Australians and some Indians would even get around the language issue.

I think that's a good idea, we need to focus on getting the foreign-born into American law schools.

Posted by: AmishDude at July 29, 2010 09:06 AM (T0NGe)

121 @deadman,
I'm with you on this one.  The birthright is sacrosanct and I think the founders were right in putting it in the constitution.  Your solution, I think is a workable one.

Of course the less benefits we give out, the less concern over who pays for what.  As for enforcing the border and deporting captured criminals, a no brainer, which of course means the feds will lag on it. 

What I don't get is in all this movement for immigration reform, nary a word is said about fixing things for those immigrants who are following the rules and and stuck in a Kafkaesque night-mare that is our current immigration system.  We WANT more Americans, particularly the motivated law-abiding kind.  We should be helping them first.

Posted by: ElamBend at July 29, 2010 09:07 AM (eXX1a)

122 I don't know about you guys, but Mexican chicks are hawt... Amnesty for all the single ladies.

I jest, kind of.

Posted by: Stan at July 29, 2010 09:07 AM (9rQOT)

123

John McCain was seen going from hospital to hospital in Arizona, putting women on a bus, and driving them to mexico right before they had babies.

Vote McCain in 2010

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:07 AM (wuv1c)

124

35 This is all well and good, but my lawn isn't going to mow itself.


My lawn is emo, so it cuts itself

Posted by: s'moron at July 29, 2010 09:07 AM (UaxA0)

125 Vic: "Yeah, I just wish he was up for election this year. He would be out like a light."

I thought the same for his butt buddy, McCain. Never underestimate the American voters' willingness to a) be fooled, b) vote against self-interest, c) embrace ignorance, or d) turn retard.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at July 29, 2010 09:07 AM (swuwV)

126 don't have time to look it up but I"m pretty sure they changed all the citizenship rules during either clinton's administration or bush's.

A friend had to apply for their newborn's American birth certificate cause the kid was born overseas.  It was a pain.  Two American parents, but the kid's citizenship had to be applied for?  My friend kept saying "this is not right, this is not right".  But I could be wrong about some details cause she really wasn't sending out coherent messages at this time, since she was under enormous stess cause there is apparently a time window for this to be done

Posted by: curious at July 29, 2010 09:07 AM (p302b)

127

Why don't we have a quota of foreign-born law school students?  Brits, Australians and some Indians would even get around the language issue.

I think that's a good idea, we need to focus on getting the foreign-born into American law schools.

I was refering more to engineers, scientists, etc.

I don't know if we need more lawyers, but hey.

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:08 AM (wuv1c)

128 Amnesty for all the single ladies.

I jest, kind of.

I don't.  There is an immigration category for "fashion models", I want one for "hot chicks desperate for green cards".

Posted by: AmishDude at July 29, 2010 09:08 AM (T0NGe)

129

Mexican chicks are hawt..


Oh, yeah, baby!  4 foot 2 and rounder than a blueberry.

HOTHOTHOT

(the mustache usually sends me into orbit, too)

Posted by: s'moron at July 29, 2010 09:08 AM (UaxA0)

130 Rush just said that Charlie is not going to his own hearing?

Posted by: curious at July 29, 2010 09:09 AM (p302b)

131 Freekin' italic thingy didn't work for me. Again.

The first 'graf of my 1:59 post was copied from progressoverpeace.

Posted by: MrScribbler at July 29, 2010 02:04 PM (Ulu3i)

That's why I put "-->" on the pasted parts, just in case the italics screw up.

BTW, I meant that the US can fill up on visa overstays (I didn't say "overstay", but that is what I meant) very easily, which is why there is no way to ever actually seal the nation.  We will always have many illegals running around.  That means that the only policy that means anything, with respect to illegals, is interior enforcement.  Everything else is just adjusting the deck chairs.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 29, 2010 09:09 AM (Qp4DT)

132

Posted by: s'moron at July 29, 2010 02:08 PM (UaxA0)

Those are outliers, and more likely, those are not the single ones.

Posted by: Stan at July 29, 2010 09:10 AM (9rQOT)

133 I mow my own lawn, with a push mower. I have another house with a large lawn I don't have time to mow. So I hire my cousin's kid to do it. He is American. He won't do it for 25 bucks, so I pay him 40. Simple.

Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 09:10 AM (OlN4e)

134
Why should Rangle go to his hearings? He didn't do anything wrong. He investigated his ethics charges and found nothing.

Posted by: Alpha & Omega Man at July 29, 2010 09:10 AM (uFokq)

135

That depends, Ace. 5 years ago here in Arkansas I never saw a Mexican, now we're ass deep in them. I don't mean Hispanic Americans, I mean non-English speaking wet backs. We just got a petition signed (77,000+ signatures required) to put a constitutional amendment on next Septembers ballot that forces anyone who wants any kind of government benefits to prove citizenship. Applies to everyone except in cases of emergency and those under 14 yoa. People here are fed up.

Same situation here, I live in Nebraska, not far from Fremont actually.  We're not exactly what you'd call a border state, not by a long shot, but we have a very large illegal population - one that is an ever growing drain on our local economy because while they take out of the system, they don't put much back into the system.  Their paid in cash, under the table, and their income isn't taxed.  So the state and local muncipalities keep having to raise our taxes to help pay for the services that they and their kids use, like public schools, hospitals, etc...

Eventually something is going to break, we just can't keep adding more and more of this without that happening.  People here are getting pretty fed up with that too, hence the Fremont law which the pansy city council backed away from out of fear of legal fees.

But I think Fremont (at least it's citizens) is on the right track here, as far as what the feds should do.  Look, I don't think anyone thinks we have the resources to round up the multiple millions of illegals roaming our country.  But if you cut off their incentive for being here, they will have no choice but to return home.

So the solution, as I see it, is fairly simple overall.  You pass a law that makes it a major federal crime to hire someone for a job or to rent to someone who cannot prove either citizenship or resident alien status, and you give it some serious teeth, and enforce the damn thing.

First offense if you get caught employing illegals you pay a huge fine.  Second offense, you pay a huge fine and get mandatory jail time.  Third offense, you get a major amount of mandatory jail time, no less than 5 years.

Same with landlords who rent to illegals.   If there are no jobs and no places to live they will have to return home, there's no incentive for them to stay.  Then maybe you can start thinking about putting together a guest worker program that's worth a crap. 

Sadly though the odds of that happening aren't good at all, too much pandering on both sides of the aisle at the moment.

Posted by: StuckOnStupid at July 29, 2010 09:11 AM (e8T35)

136 Rush just said that Charlie is not going to his own hearing? Posted by: curious at July 29, 2010 02:09 PM (p302b) Well it's not like he can hear anymore anyway?

Posted by: nevergiveup at July 29, 2010 09:11 AM (0GFWk)

137

Mexico's largest exports for 2010:

1. Illegal drugs

2. Tequila

3. Cleavage

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 09:12 AM (RkRxq)

138

I don't know if we need more lawyers, but hey.

Well, we don't need more, but maybe we could work out a trade program.. They send us a couple of guys, we send them the ACLU..

Posted by: StuckOnStupid at July 29, 2010 09:12 AM (e8T35)

139 I don't trust him. It'll be one of those laws we won't really know what's in it unless it's passed.

Posted by: jellytoast at July 29, 2010 09:13 AM (U8Rfl)

140

But the ERA was never really all that popular, you know.

Two words:

Phyllis Schlafly

Without her it wold have passed. It was being pushed as the next 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Graham's racist amendment to deport innocent infants? Doesn't have a chance.

Posted by: Ed Anger at July 29, 2010 09:13 AM (7+pP9)

141 Rush just said that Charlie is not going to his own hearing?

Posted by: curious at July 29, 2010 02:09 PM (p302b)

Why don't you all just mind your own g*dd@mn business?

Posted by: "Good-time" Charlie Rangel at July 29, 2010 09:14 AM (mtAxB)

142

I think we should make a deal with other nations. If you take one of our politicians and promise they will never be allowed to leave your country, you can send us 5,000 people who we will give automatic citizenship

I think that is a fair trade.

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:14 AM (wuv1c)

143

I don't know if we need more lawyers, but hey.

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 02:08 PM (wuv1c)

Supply and demand, the more lawyers you have, the less they get paid and the fewer of them will be in a position to be our overlords.

I was refering more to engineers, scientists, etc.

Tell me what state you live in.  I will look at the local university in the math, CS or EE departments for somebody under the age of 45 who graduated with a Bachelor's from an American university (that is a reasonable threshold for being "American" although pretty weak).  Sometimes that information is not easily found, but I'm willing to bet that if I can find it, you would be shocked how low the percentage is.

Americans don't do math, science or engineering anymore.  It's for chumps, we'll just import them.  Go to law school, young man, that's where the easy money is.

Posted by: AmishDude at July 29, 2010 09:14 AM (T0NGe)

144

Give us your tired, your hungy, your whores...

Posted by: rdbrewer at July 29, 2010 09:14 AM (1DVez)

145

Mexico's largest exports for 2010:

1. Illegal drugs

2. Tequila

3. Cleavage

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 02:12 PM (RkRxq)

Number 3 makes the deal.

Amnesty for all!

Posted by: TexasJew at July 29, 2010 09:14 AM (o7kZZ)

146 Amishdude, that's my point.  We need to take the best and brightest engineers and scientists from other nations, and get as many of them living here as possible.

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:16 AM (wuv1c)

147 We give amnesty in exchange for this amendment--which SCOTUS will strike down--means we get nothing in return.

Posted by: Daryl Herbert at July 29, 2010 09:16 AM (lvA0V)

148 I thought the same for his butt buddy, McCain. Never underestimate the American voters' willingness to a) be fooled, b) vote against self-interest, c) embrace ignorance, or d) turn retard.

The difference is that in the past 2 years he has been censured by three local Republican caucuses for his RINO deeds. So he is started to lose the support of the Party. He hasn't had the support of the actual voting base for a long time.

He was reelected in the primaries last time through chicanery. What's more he actually had to do a runoff because during the initial primary he didn't even get 50% of the vote.

He is in worse shape now that he was in 2008. Mainly because as soon as the election was over he moved hard to the left.

Posted by: Vic at July 29, 2010 09:16 AM (/jbAw)

149 I'll agree to grant amnesty to all illegals on one condition - they get to stay and make a life for themselves but they have to get the word amnesty tattooed on on their foreheads in big bold letters. After paying a fee for a license, citizens can hunt the illegals for sport. See I just fixed immigration and the national debt. Gave ya a two fer.

Posted by: ChicagoJedi at July 29, 2010 09:17 AM (WZFkG)

150 They're EVERYWHERE.  In Guerneville, for Christ's sake, hanging around a parking on the one street running through town:  Obviously Central American / south Mexican / Mayan / non-English speaking young men waiting for 'cash work'

Vineyard workers are hired in Santa Rosa, twenty miles away; these guys are in a retirement / tourist area with high unemployment and hardly any housing construction ( thanks to the California Coastal Commission ).

What prevents the feds from raiding this blatant violation of federal law?

Posted by: SantaRosaStan, who's found his hill at July 29, 2010 09:17 AM (JrRME)

151 123 I don't know about you guys, but Mexican chicks are hawt... Amnesty for all the single ladies.

I jest, kind of.

Posted by: Stan at July 29, 2010 02:07 PM (9rQOT)

Obviously you have seen a very limited number of Mexican women. They can be 'teh hot', but the other 90% of the time they are hotness challenged.

Besides, that hotness factor gets old quick when you have to deal with their idiot families and their looks sharply peak betwen 18-25. I'm talking a very short shelf life on 'the hot' before the weight gain kicks in. On the plus side the vast majority of them seem to be excellent cooks, provided you like Mexican food. If you eat it all the time you will be even fatter than they ever will be.

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at July 29, 2010 09:18 AM (oIp16)

152

"I want one for "hot chicks desperate for green cards".

A friend once told me of his desire to turn this country into the United States of Hot Asian Chicks.  It was gonna be some sort of mega internationl exchange program.

Posted by: Joanie (Oven Gloves) at July 29, 2010 09:18 AM (HaYO4)

153
He's lying.

Posted by: Dang Straights at July 29, 2010 09:18 AM (fx8sm)

154 ... your crack hos, your trannies...

Posted by: rdbrewer at July 29, 2010 09:18 AM (1DVez)

155

Lead paragraph at Politico on Grahamnesty's anchor baby pander: 

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) announced Wednesday night that he is considering introducing a constitutional amendment that would change existing law to no longer grant citizenship to the children of immigrants born in the United States. 

The actual Grahamnesty quote:

“Birthright citizenship I think is a mistake ...  We should change our Constitution and say if you come here illegally and you have a child, that child's automatically not a citizen.” 

Notice a word gone missing?  Is that the JournoList line Andy Barr?  What a partisan hack.

Posted by: motionview at July 29, 2010 09:18 AM (lKDF0)

156 Gunslinger: "As for the criminally inclined, throw -em out just like any other deportation subject."

Not good enough. We know, with oodles of evidence, that this is inadequate. A deported criminal will make a U-turn at the border and return to recommit within hours of deportation. IMO the only solution is to have a lowest tier, lowest cost prison (read NO AMENITIES) to house the doubly-criminal for the defined sentence... and then deport them.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at July 29, 2010 09:19 AM (swuwV)

157 We give amnesty in exchange for this amendment--which SCOTUS will strike down--means we get nothing in return.

Posted by: Daryl Herbert at July 29, 2010 02:16 PM (lvA0V)

The SCOTUS cannot strike down a Constitutional amendment. 

That said, this amendment is unnecessary (as the 14th already prohibits anchor babies).

Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 29, 2010 09:19 AM (Qp4DT)

158

114 (I respond to myself)

And I answer, "No, fundamental principles cannot be compromised in any way when they're correct. Unless one is willing to play the game of compromise to achieve only part of a righteous end. And if it's only part, it isn't correct."

 

Posted by: dum blond at July 29, 2010 09:20 AM (gbCNS)

159 Down here, I am the wetback.

Posted by: TexasJew at July 29, 2010 09:21 AM (o7kZZ)

160 I think we should cut a deal with mexico, for every 10 illegal aliens they send to us, we should be able to dump 1 ton of garbage over one of their major cities from a 747.

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:21 AM (wuv1c)

161

Why aren't these protestors--pretending this is a 60s civil rights issue be-in--why aren't they protesting anying Mexico does? 

They found a mass grave just outside Juarez last week, for example.  Mass effing grave.

All the murders, corruption. 

Posted by: rdbrewer at July 29, 2010 09:21 AM (1DVez)

162 Drive up window clown talking.

Posted by: dogfish at July 29, 2010 09:22 AM (Ncv/n)

163

Somewhat O/T..

I have a few ideas about this...

Upon reading the outdated and ancient form of media formally called a "newspaper" the other day, i stumbled across a story about a young illegal alien (undocumented democrat) who was attending college and had recieved student loans for said college. The story was written by the Arizona Republic (although i call it the arizona repugnant) to make this illegal out to be some sort of hero. He was planning on going back to mexico and coming in "the right way." Now this sounds good in theory, but my bigger issue is the fact that he has been taking MY tax money to pay for himself his entire life.

To clarify my poin, I think if somewhere down the road we are faced with an amnesty bill, we should fight to have a clause put in that says in order to receive citizenship you have to repay every single dime that you took out of the taxpayers wallets before you are a legal citizen. Give them a minimum wage job ($7.25 in AZ) But only pay them at a rate of 4 dollars an hour like they would be getting now. The rest will go into their repayment plan for suckling the teat of the taxpayer.

Now being from Arizona myself yesterday was a devastating day for me. The injuction placed on sb1070 truly depressed me to the point i couldnt eat. Now what i think Jan should do at this point is declare the border an emergency zone, put AZ in a state of emergency and deploy as many AZ national guard troops as we can to the border and circumvent the courts. Im sure that there has been enough crime to justify a state of emergency for arizona. I personally have been broken into 3 times (2 times in my new house 1 time in my old house) and I live in a nice neighborhood. The only question is how much spine does Jan have.

Posted by: Conservative from nAZi at July 29, 2010 09:22 AM (SebJz)

164 TJ, you're a matzo back.

Posted by: rdbrewer at July 29, 2010 09:22 AM (1DVez)

165 147 Amishdude, that's my point.  We need to take the best and brightest engineers and scientists from other nations, and get as many of them living here as possible.

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 02:16 PM (wuv1c)

Not so much, Ben. With no manufacturing, you don't need engineers, other than for infrastructure and public construction, and even there the regulations you have to follow limit how much actual engineering is needed. Manufacturing is being chased out of this country by not the least of which is the government. Manufacturing exploits poor people and pollutes the environment donchaknow? With no drilling in the gulf, you probably don't need many petroleum engineers there, for example.

Anyway, I think we are quite capable of training all the professionals we need without importing. We aren't really short of people, maybe smart people, but the whole world is populated by idiots, anyway.

Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 09:22 AM (OlN4e)

166 Since I'm part amerind, you're all -backs to me.

Posted by: rdbrewer at July 29, 2010 09:23 AM (1DVez)

167 146 Not for Graham unless you mean butt cleavage

Posted by: dagny at July 29, 2010 09:23 AM (/jVLU)

168

They found a mass grave just outside Juarez last week, for example.  Mass effing grave.

All the murders, corruption. 

Posted by: rdbrewer at July 29, 2010 02:21 PM (1DVez)

Well, it's certainly helped with the parking in downtown Juarez, I noticed

Posted by: TexasJew at July 29, 2010 09:23 AM (o7kZZ)

169 There is no law preventing the little rugrat from going back with his/her parents back to wherever they came from. 

Posted by: doom_n_gloom at July 29, 2010 09:23 AM (LNOg6)

170 Some woman plowed into the back of my Mom's car at a red light here in Chicago. The woman was illegal, had no insurance, no ID, and couldn't speak a word of English. The police came, but didn't arrest the woman or even write her a ticket. After they let her go they agreed the woman was completely at fault but since she was illegal she wouldn't bother to pay the ticket anyway and she'd just be released if they detained her because the government wouldn't deport her. Agreeing to any sort of amnesty for even one illegal leaves the blood of their victims on your hands.

Posted by: ChicagoJedi at July 29, 2010 09:24 AM (WZFkG)

171 Amishdude, that's my point.  We need to take the best and brightest engineers and scientists from other nations, and get as many of them living here as possible.

It's a disaster for the population at large.  Instead of being well-informed and intellectually diverse, we're becoming lazy women's studies majors.  It happened to Rome.  They couldn't be bothered with the hard work, so they just exploited others' and mooched off of it.

It didn't turn out well.

When one specialization is farmed out to people who have no particular tie to the nation they work in, you end up with an unhealthy society.

A society of lawyers.

We don't need a country where science is for chumps.

Posted by: AmishDude at July 29, 2010 09:24 AM (T0NGe)

172

Anyway, I think we are quite capable of training all the professionals we need without importing. We aren't really short of people, maybe smart people, but the whole world is populated by idiots, anyway.

 

you're also missing the other benefit. By taking the smartest from other countries, we are putting them at a competative disadvantage.

We will always need engineers and scientists. Also we still do a TON of manufacturing, it just isn't your grandfathers assembly line manufacturing. It is electronics, computers, but also steel, mining, metals, etc.

For every machine that enters the assembly line process, we need an engineer to design it, maintain it, fix it, etc.

I have no problem letting the scientifically and mathematically educated into out country.

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:25 AM (wuv1c)

173 All this talk about violence in Mexico makes me want to rent Man On Fire.

Posted by: ErikW at July 29, 2010 09:26 AM (fDRif)

174

When one specialization is farmed out to people who have no particular tie to the nation they work in, you end up with an unhealthy society.

After a generation they will be as american as you or I. I am not saying import them as indians in america, or germans in america, import them and make them americans.

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:26 AM (wuv1c)

175

Nearly 5k Americans killed each day by illegals.

What's the rush.

that can't be true, that would be 1.825 million people

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 01:39 PM (wuv1c)

You're right obviously.  My mistake.  It is twelve a day though and >4.3k deaths a year.

http://tinyurl.com/2b8346e

Still a large number, imo. 

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 09:27 AM (RkRxq)

176 I was sideswiped by an illegal at an intersection while a cop was directing traffic. The cop witnessed this van full of illegals ignore his directions and plow into me. He just let them go, cause they had ID and in his words would be "too difficult to do anything." And I think someone else pointed out that 5000 Americans die at the hands of illegals every year/month/week? That a lot of preventable crime. Agreeing to any sort of amnesty for even one illegal leaves the blood of their victims on your hands.

Posted by: ChicagoJedi at July 29, 2010 09:27 AM (WZFkG)

177 * that should be "had NO id"

Posted by: ChicagoJedi at July 29, 2010 09:27 AM (WZFkG)

178

A society of lawyers.

We don't need a country where science is for chumps.

you're right, but not letting in educated immigrants isn't going to motivate the lazy to all of the sudden become scientists. It isn't an either or proposition.

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:27 AM (wuv1c)

179 deportion does seem impossible, and i'm really not interested in seeing pictures that resemble the child from Cuba  being taken back.. which is why i support  going after the employers, fines 1st time ,business  and jail the next time , (those who Most benefit). no welfare services or hospitals unless an emergency

Posted by: willow at July 29, 2010 09:28 AM (SbsTp)

180 The SCOTUS cannot strike down a Constitutional amendment.

Watch me.

Posted by: Wise Latina at July 29, 2010 09:28 AM (T0NGe)

181

I don't know about you guys, but Mexican chicks are hawt... Amnesty for all the single ladies.

There would have to be an expiration date.  Those hawt Mexican chicks tend to turn into porky Mexican middle-aged women.  Linda Rondstadt, I'm lookin' at you. 

Posted by: Cicero at July 29, 2010 09:29 AM (QKKT0)

182 Those who've read my comments know that I'm as fiercely anti-immigration as they come, but I'd be willing to trade almost anything for the elimination of birthright citizenship.

Of course, we shouldn't have to "trade" anything for it because it was created out of whole cloth by a bogus interpretation of law by some assholes in black robes, but...

Posted by: the peanut gallery at July 29, 2010 09:29 AM (NurK6)

183 Deportation is not impossible. That's just silly. It could be done in a year. What is lacking is the political will to do it. Simple as that.

Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 09:29 AM (OlN4e)

184 The SCOTUS cannot strike down a Constitutional amendment.

Watch me.

Posted by: Wise Latina at July 29, 2010 02:28 PM (T0NGe)


You're just going to empathize it away.  A distinction without a difference, perhaps.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at July 29, 2010 09:30 AM (Qp4DT)

185

You're right obviously.  My mistake.  It is twelve a day though and >4.3k deaths a year.

 

yeah mistakes happen.

It's just when i read that number i thought about the Women's Right's groups that used to always say a million women a year died from domestic abuse between 1970 and 2000.  And someone had to point out that no, 30 million women didn't die in that time period from domestic abuse, because someone, you know, would have noticed that many death.

 

If 1.825 million americans were killed by illegals every year our border would like more like the north and south korean border

 

 

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:30 AM (wuv1c)

186 161 I think we should cut a deal with mexico, for every 10 illegal aliens they send to us, we should be able to dump 1 ton of garbage over one of their major cities from a 747. Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 02:21 PM (wuv1c) They wouldn't notice

Posted by: ChicagoJedi at July 29, 2010 09:30 AM (WZFkG)

187
There would have to be an expiration date.  Those hawt Mexican chicks tend to turn into porky Mexican middle-aged women.  Linda Rondstadt, I'm lookin' at you. 

Posted by: Cicero at July 29, 2010 02:29 PM (QKKT0)

alright I'm going to have a knee jerk moment as a woman.

many of us do with age, of any ethnicity..

(not me of course)

Posted by: willow at July 29, 2010 09:31 AM (SbsTp)

188 Middle age spread? Common, who's got it. Fess up!

Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 09:32 AM (OlN4e)

189 There would have to be an expiration date.  Those hawt Mexican chicks tend to turn into porky Mexican middle-aged women.  Linda Rondstadt, I'm lookin' at you. 

Posted by: Cicero at July 29, 2010 02:29 PM (QKKT0)

Raquel Welsh
Victoria Principal
Vickie Carr

I'll stand up for those chicas..

Posted by: TexasJew at July 29, 2010 09:33 AM (o7kZZ)

190

That said, this amendment is unnecessary (as the 14th already prohibits anchor babies).

Give us a couple months.

Posted by: Sotomayor, Kagan, and Ginsburg at July 29, 2010 09:34 AM (e8YaH)

191 but not letting in educated immigrants isn't going to motivate the lazy to all of the sudden become scientists. It isn't an either or proposition.

Supply and demand.  If you were to (I don't advocate this) cut off all immigration for science and engineering jobs, the wages for such jobs would skyrocket, it would be a more desirable profession and more people would seek it out. 

If it is true that there are smart lawyers (I'm skeptical), then higher wages in engineering would convince several of them to have sought it out as a profession, rather than wussing it out in a graduate program with no math, no dissertation and no foreign competition.

Not only is it simple supply and demand, but the fact that an employer can use the immigration system itself and the threat of having the visa end to pay the immigrant even less depresses wages.

Posted by: Wise Latina at July 29, 2010 09:34 AM (T0NGe)

192

If 1.825 million americans were killed by illegals every year our border would like more like the north and south korean border

 Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 02:30 PM (wuv1c)

You're right and I am (sincerely) chagrined.  Sometimes my fingers outpace my train (of thought).  I need to be more careful.

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 09:35 AM (RkRxq)

193

maddog, i said it seems. why did i say it, because it is an ugly visual for many ., (ok maybe just me)

go After those that Benefit most! the employers!  The International Unions! etc..

heck the Dem party that  faccilitate breaking our laws ! willfully!

they are the Americans breaking our laws !

maybe just ignore me. i'll understand.

Posted by: willow at July 29, 2010 09:35 AM (SbsTp)

194 Off sock.

Posted by: AmishDude at July 29, 2010 09:35 AM (T0NGe)

195

we are quite capable of training all the professionals we need without importing. We aren't really short of people

Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 02:22 PM (OlN4e)

For all of our history until the past four decades, America was able to find enough engineers, scientists, etc--enough to create the most successful economy, win WWII, etc, etc.  Reagan was right:  American was that 'shining city on a hill'

We don't need to suck in people from the rest of the world--all they do is take jobs ( lives and careers and opportunities ) from Americans.

Deportation on a gradual scale is VERY possible.  The reality of deportation will cause "the Arizona effect":  faced with deportation, most illegals will leave and likely illegal immigrants won't come here.

Sometimes, amigos, the problem is muy complex but the solution is simple

Posted by: SantaRosaStan, who's found his hill at July 29, 2010 09:35 AM (JrRME)

196

maddog i still have the hips of a 20 year old.

i didn't say which one

Posted by: willow at July 29, 2010 09:36 AM (SbsTp)

197 Raquel Welsh
Victoria Principal
Vickie Carr

I'll stand up for those chicas..

Posted by: TexasJew at July 29, 2010 02:33 PM (o7kZZ)

I sense a change in the direction of this thread.

P I C T U R E S!

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 09:36 AM (RkRxq)

198 My plan: #1 Anchor babies not registered as citizens of another country within 30days become wards of the state. Then, table the amendment for discussion. #2 Fix the system for checking status - make it quick, easy, and universal (cops, jailers, employers, hospitals,etc). I really don't see why an answerback voice/email system matching SSN to name and birthplace with a 16character hash would be so hard to implement. (Include the response on the I9 and 1099K) #3 No highway funds for any state with sanctuary cities; not just dejure - but defacto based on arrest & deportation statistics. #4 Separate the southern border into smaller operational sectors; and allow each sector to implement doctrine, operations, material solution in competition and comparison with each other - promote success. #5 Allow non-in-person applications for visa through authorized agents (lawyers) in home countries, with a significant penalty fee. If they came here and were successful - then they get to stay, if not ... Base fee off of number of illegals detained from that country - higher fee for larger number of illegals.

Posted by: A Soviet Officer at July 29, 2010 09:36 AM (2kfvQ)

199 Dump the anchor babies loophole, and institute a moritorium on all immigration from Mexico and most Centeral American countries until such time has passed that the number of illegal's amnestyed in this countrys catches up with their immigration quotas. In Mexico's case that would be about 80 years.

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at July 29, 2010 09:37 AM (oIp16)

200 from Americans.

Deportation on a gradual scale is VERY possible.  The reality of deportation will cause "the Arizona effect":  faced with deportation, most illegals will leave and likely illegal immigrants won't come here.

Sometimes, amigos, the problem is muy complex but the solution is simple

Posted by: SantaRosaStan, who's found his hill at July 29, 2010 02:35 PM (JrRME)

whew This!

thanks for stating it so much better

Posted by: willow at July 29, 2010 09:38 AM (SbsTp)

201 middle age spread? not me either! thanks, wonky thyroid! I just want to echo the extreme, very rapid changes wrought by the recent influx of illegals to NON-border states. My part of Pennsy, for example. When we moved here in 2003 I would have sent my kids to the public schools. I did a tour of my elementary - probably a handful of possibly Mexican children? And it was not remotely over-full. Now? So overfull more than half the students have to go out to trailers for class. And the vast majority of these children need ESL and other supplementary classes. And don't get me started on the constant lice. Sorry, but when you live in a house with 12 "uncles" these poor kids just can't seem to get rid of them, which means the schools can't get rid of them, which is why the AAP is now saying to let them go to school lice and all (they were missing too much, plus there was never anyone at home it seemed like when they tried to send em home) The whole thing is really sad. Last year our local elementary principal had 50 kids sitting in the hallway outside his office ALL DAY waiting for someone to pick them up after they failed the lice-check. So, yeah, I'm really enjoying living in a third-world country so my cheap-ass neighbors can underpay someone to clean their house (they're retired!!!!) and mow their lawn and watch their grandkids. Bunch of annoying middle class people pretending to be landed gentry and exploiting poor Mexican Indians in the process.

Posted by: BlackOrchid at July 29, 2010 09:40 AM (SB0V2)

202

My idea on controlling immigration along the southern border;

Go to Mexico, copy thier immigration laws, duplicate them for this country.

e.g. 2 yrs in prison - 1st offense, 10 yrs second offense.

(if memory serves)

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 09:40 AM (RkRxq)

203 Sorry, had an old sock on -- "A Soviet Officer" was me

Posted by: Jean at July 29, 2010 09:40 AM (XSlA+)

204

Americans don't do math, science or engineering anymore.  It's for chumps, we'll just import them.

Posted by: AmishDude at July 29, 2010 02:14 PM (T0NGe)

I've done a lot of graduate studies in engineering at UT/Austin (I really need to get that MS Thesis finished, some day!) and whereas it is true that the majority of engineering students are foreign-born, they now tend to return to their homes after graduation.

They see where the opportunities are heading.

Posted by: TexasJew at July 29, 2010 09:40 AM (o7kZZ)

205 Once America as a whole gets serious about deportation 99.99% of all illegals will flee out of the country. We've seen it time and again. When a town or state gets serious they flee somewhere else. Where do think all those illegals went after they had a garage sale and fled Arizona. They moved in next door to you. Give them no safe harbor and watch them vanish.

Posted by: ChicagoJedi at July 29, 2010 09:40 AM (WZFkG)

206 >>Dump the anchor babies loophole, and institute a moritorium on all immigration from Mexico and most Centeral American countries until such time has passed that the number of illegal's amnestyed in this countrys catches up with their immigration quotas. In Mexico's case that would be about 80 years. See my comment #95. I think we have the making of a plan. Put the pressure on the offending countries, not ours.

Posted by: JackStraw at July 29, 2010 09:40 AM (VW9/y)

207 for the squeamish, realize that deportation will only be used for a very few hard-core system-gamers if the Spigot of Welfare is cut off"

NO AFDC FOR ILLEGALS; NO HOUSING VOUCHERS FOR ILLEGALS; NO TUITION-FREE COLLEGE FOR ILLEGALS; NO MEDICARE FOR ILLEGALS; NO MEDICAL FOR ILLEGALS;   etc etc

This is all a political ploy by the Usual Suspects:  They want voters and they want the de-White-ification of America.   If we let them, they will drown us.


Posted by: SantaRosaStan, who's found his hill at July 29, 2010 09:41 AM (JrRME)

208 Hussein, Heck all the new un-employed should help us all make a point, run the borders of Mexico, say we want food stamps, welfare and section 8. demand they comply, riot in the streets

Posted by: willow at July 29, 2010 09:42 AM (SbsTp)

209 Amend the Constitution? I'm afraid neither you nor the States have standing.

Posted by: SCOTUS 2.0 at July 29, 2010 09:43 AM (swuwV)

210 206. lol, yes actually they literally DID move in next door to me! Ed Rendell loves him some illegals

Posted by: BlackOrchid at July 29, 2010 09:43 AM (SB0V2)

211

P I C T U R E S!

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 02:36 PM (RkRxq)

Living here on the border where it is 85+% Mexican, I can tell you that the well-to-do ladies generally keep in good shape. Their Mexican husbands typically take on young mistresses, so there is that kind of competition going on.

It's a cultural thing, and although it is changing, there are many undertones within the society here.

Posted by: TexasJew at July 29, 2010 09:45 AM (o7kZZ)

212 207 >>Dump the anchor babies loophole, and institute a moritorium on all immigration from Mexico and most Centeral American countries until such time has passed that the number of illegal's amnestyed in this countrys catches up with their immigration quotas. In Mexico's case that would be about 80 years.


See my comment #95. I think we have the making of a plan. Put the pressure on the offending countries, not ours.

Posted by: JackStraw at July 29, 2010 02:40 PM (VW9/y)

Ahhh... I see.

That would kick Mexico back to the year 2400

If I were to seriously advocate for that or anything like it, would would still need to deport about 2/3rds of them first, but it looks like we are on the same wavelength.

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at July 29, 2010 09:46 AM (oIp16)

213

Just a thought... every "desirable" mathematician or scientist who would  be given amnesty is just as much a part of the microcosm of humanity as anyone i.e. subject to the destructive ways of liberal thought. Any compromise made for them is, at its fundamental level, all that it ever was: A useless compromise.

 

Posted by: dum blond at July 29, 2010 09:46 AM (gbCNS)

214 184 Deportation is not impossible. That's just silly. It could be done in a year. What is lacking is the political will to do it. Simple as that.

Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 02:29 PM (OlN4e)


Hallefuckinglujah!!  We've had mass deportations  before.  Operation wetback (not making that up) has been done twice, in the 30's and the 50's.  See link below (for some stupid reason I'm too fucking dumb to hot link that).  Over a million illegal Mexicans both times.  IT CAN BE DONE!


http://tinyurl.com/prtjq

Posted by: Hedgehog at July 29, 2010 09:47 AM (oQIfB)

215

Hallefuckinglujah!!  We've had mass deportations  before.  Operation wetback (not making that up) has been done twice, in the 30's and the 50's.  See link below (for some stupid reason I'm too fucking dumb to hot link that).  Over a million illegal Mexicans both times.  IT CAN BE DONE!


Posted by: Hedgehog at July 29, 2010 02:47 PM (oQIfB)

http://tinyurl.com/prtjq

For everyone deported NINE self-deported.

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at July 29, 2010 09:50 AM (oIp16)

216 209 Hussein, Heck all the new un-employed should help us all make a point, run the borders of Mexico, say we want food stamps, welfare and section 8. demand they comply, riot in the streets

Posted by: willow at July 29, 2010 02:42 PM (SbsTp)

I don't know what unemployment pays an hour but just say it's $350/wk.  That's around nine an hour.  That's not much.  They just passed a bill for $20 billion to just extend unemployment benefits.

If they offered to pay a million people $15/hr.  That would cost $30 billion - for an entire year.  Looks to me like a better deal than unemployment.

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 09:51 AM (RkRxq)

217

i also think it should be pointed out

If people are sincere about the status of mexicos citizens  , Mexicos elite should be kicked in the teeth for not doing well by their populace. where's the friggen jobs, business , governance that faccilitates this?

if we can go around the world and fight for freedom. why not heckle Mexicos elite?

why not constantly point out they are freaks of humanity to not help their citizens, to run them into other countries for survival

Posted by: willow at July 29, 2010 09:52 AM (SbsTp)

218
The 14th Amendment was to make sure the children of slaves were US citizens.

NOT the whole damn world.


Posted by: Lemon Kitten at July 29, 2010 09:53 AM (0fzsA)

219 @127 curious

Please google FS-240.

Your friend was likely talking about this form.  It is titled, "Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United States of America."

I've had to produce this document at least twice in my life (once service-related and once for a background investigation), and I was born in the late 60s.  Both times were before Clinton took office.

Posted by: MikeO at July 29, 2010 09:53 AM (lBmZl)

220 Everyone keeps talking about "can't deport 20 million illegals". But the same liberals who say that think we can confiscate 300 million handguns.

But seriously all it would take is to eliminate all the welfare and start jailing people who hire them and not only will they quit coming, but the ones here will leave on their own.

Posted by: Vic at July 29, 2010 09:54 AM (/jbAw)

221

It's a cultural thing, and although it is changing, there are many undertones within the society here.

Posted by: TexasJew at July 29, 2010 02:45 PM (o7kZZ)

I used to live in Houston (Clear Lake).  I remember how it is.  I also remember that the Mexicans themselves tended to take pretty sick advantage of their countrymen and women.  At least when I was there, there was a lot of underaged forced prostitution.  The law tended not to notice so much.

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 09:55 AM (RkRxq)

222 >>If I were to seriously advocate for that or anything like it, would would still need to deport about 2/3rds of them first, but it looks like we are on the same wavelength. My hope is that it would cause such a shit storm in the offending countries among people who want to play by the rules and immigrate legally that their gov'ts would have to start taking this problem seriously. Here's the amnesty. If you want amnesty you must register. Anyone who is here illegally and doesn't register will be deported no questions asked. The US then takes each case to the offending gov't and gives them the option, take this guy back or forfeit 5 legal immigration slots. I'm sick of all these arguments that say we can't take the family of a legal (anchor baby) out. Screw that. Make the offending country pay the price if they want them to stay in the US. I bet that would make them think twice about letting their people jump our borders. There is absolutely no reason we should have to just accept this situation. I have a lot more contempt for the gov'ts who allow this shit to happen with a wink than the people who are coming here.

Posted by: JackStraw at July 29, 2010 09:55 AM (VW9/y)

223 Mexicos elite should be kicked in the teeth for not doing well by their populace.

Exactly.

It's bad enough we have to pretend that so many basket-case shitholes around the world are functioning states worthy of exercising sovereignty.

It's at least an order of magnitude worse to share a border with one.

Posted by: MikeO at July 29, 2010 09:56 AM (lBmZl)

224

Did you guys know that without illegals and the children of illegals sucking at the teet of public assistance and education, California's budget would not only be balanced, but that we would be in the black by 3 billion a year?

You want fiscal restraint and less government spending, then start HERE!

Posted by: Jim in San Diego at July 29, 2010 09:58 AM (oIp16)

225 Yeah, Lindsey, like that will ever happen. It would be funny if it wasn't such a cynical attempt to ingratiate himself with Republicans whom he has pissed off in his state. He would be lucky if it was ratified by more than two states.

Posted by: Rangel/Greene 2012 at July 29, 2010 10:00 AM (sYrWB)

226

I've said this before but this is what I believe.  We don't really know corruption like other countries do.  Like the corruption that existed during prohibition in this country.

All of that corruption was because of the massive amount of money the illegal trade generated.  Politicians and police who wanted a piece of the action could be bought off.

That kind of corruption exists in a lot of the world, including Mexico.

There is a lot of money being generated by the traffic accross our borders in drugs and illegals.

Why aren't the borders being controlled?

I think it is a distinct possibility that it may be more lucrative for the borders to remain out of control. 

And that's just me thinking outloud.

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 10:04 AM (RkRxq)

227 I agree, Ace. I'd jump at that deal.

Posted by: William at July 29, 2010 10:08 AM (4l6HJ)

228

 could see myself persuaded to support some kind of large (but not blanket) amnesty for, say, half of the illegals here, those with the longest stays and strongest ties to the country, and say a five year special visa for the rest. But five years and that's that.

 

That would certainly be the easier path to take and after 5 years just give them the country.

 

Posted by: Velvet Ambition at July 29, 2010 10:09 AM (lOzze)

229 . Their Mexican husbands typically take on young mistresses, so there is that kind of competition going on.

It's a cultural thing, and although it is changing, there are many undertones within the society here.

Posted by: TexasJew at July 29, 2010 02:45 PM (o7kZZ)

When I was living and working in the oil patch around Odessa, there was this Hispanic guy I worked with with that habit. Trouble was, he was like 5'-3" and 130 pounds, and his wife was like 5-10 and 280 pounds. You could always tell when one of his girlfriends had called his house, as he would come to work with both lips popped and twin shiners. Even his brother said his balls were bigger than his brain. Heh.

Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 10:09 AM (OlN4e)

230 JiminSD - I don't know the details, but anyone who's even scratched the surface of local school district finances knows that all but the richest school districts are dogs being wagged by two tails.

One is special-education cost, and the other is trying to teach non-English-speakers, mostly Hispanic.




Posted by: mrkwong at July 29, 2010 11:45 AM (G8Eo0)

231 Lindsey:  all flash, no dance.

It's a show.  Talking "amendment" makes him seem serious about the issue, and we know he's not--but it sounds so VERY Senatorial.

Most important, it will take several years to amend the Constitution.  He knows that.  So in the meantime, he'll demand that we simply grant amnesty to all, with malice towards none.

What a bunch of shit.

Posted by: dad29 at July 29, 2010 12:03 PM (3PS1w)

232 You wouldn't have to change the Constitution to end birthright.  It was a misinterpretation of the Constitution to begin with.

Posted by: ryukyu at July 29, 2010 12:18 PM (MOHSR)

233 104 If we just classified all illegals as mongrels, would that help? Posted by: Hussein the Plumber

I apologize for calling you a bigot. If President Barry can use the term "mongrel" on people, then it must now be magically a non-bigot term ...unless a melanin deficient person uses it of course.

I must watch The View more often ( then never ) to keep up on proper political correctness. My bad.

Posted by: Kristopher at July 29, 2010 12:47 PM (kCEOg)

234 when the GOP's Hastert ran things he FIRED all the Tepublicans and left the Ethics Commottee without a quorum after theu came out against Tom Selat for the third time So you can see that under Pelosi things are improving

Posted by: denny crane at July 29, 2010 01:18 PM (I+7Zv)

235

If there were serious enforcement (demonstrated over five years) plus this amendment, I could see myself persuaded to support some kind of large (but not blanket) amnesty for, say, half of the illegals here, those with the longest stays and strongest ties to the country, and say a five year special visa for the rest. But five years and that's that.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

 

BS. They all have to go or we will just repeat this insanity  over and over again. by the way, 12 million is a low ball estimate...more like 30 million!

Posted by: gonzotx at July 29, 2010 01:35 PM (1kwr2)

236 Hmmmm.

I don't believe a single fucking word of it.

I'm supposed to take this at face value?  From a guy who has opposed every single attempt at controlling illegal aliens?

No fucking way.  Zero cred.

Posted by: memomachine at July 29, 2010 01:48 PM (MwCol)

237

i hate Tepublicans just like Jesus loves me. Yes I'm an idiot, thanks for noticing.

Posted by: dummy crane at July 29, 2010 02:02 PM (f7A+e)

238

"BS. They all have to go or we will just repeat this insanity  over and over again. by the way, 12 million is a low ball estimate...more like 30 million!"

Bravo!  You'd think everyone would have learned from the last amnesty.  Granting (any) amnesty will just encourage more illegals in the future.  AND we wound up getting 4X the number supposedly granted amnesty.  Couldn't break up the families (back in their home country), ya know.

I've been there, done that, and I remember.  NO AMNESTY FOR ANY.

Posted by: MDr at July 29, 2010 02:13 PM (ucq49)

239

" those with the longest stays and strongest ties to the country"

We're giving tenure to illegals now? I was here first I win? How about we give it to those that speek the best english, have the highest education, or at least look the best. We have plenty of uneducated ugly people already.

Posted by: nate at July 29, 2010 02:50 PM (bxSU2)

240 Don't get too excited, Ace.  Flimsay Grahamesty is the kind of guy that would offer amnesty now for the promise of such an amendment later.  Meaning, once the amnesty is given, the amendment is kinda pointless.

Posted by: 5th Level Fighter at July 29, 2010 03:51 PM (SgL5z)

241 First Time Magazine cheerleads Rush against Obama and the enviro push to catastrophize the Gulf spill and now Lindsey Graham spontaneously sprouts conservative testicles. Wtf? I mean, WTF????  

Posted by: Henry Hawkins at July 29, 2010 03:58 PM (1neAq)

242 Even if such a Constitutional Admendment were to pass, some judge would say it was un-Constitutional. The stench from the bench is making me clench.

Posted by: torabora at July 29, 2010 04:14 PM (xGqdR)

Posted by: yixing teapots at July 29, 2010 11:25 PM (6ZwMD)

244 Good Idea.. But Linsey G . Has "no Balls"..  And He is up for a vote in Nov so he will not do anything to   Falloff the "taxpayer Gravy train"

Posted by: Dw Pepper at July 30, 2010 03:35 AM (z3PA0)

245 go to buy fendi handbags on sale
many fendi products for discount
high quality of fendi bags for cheap

Posted by: fendi handbags at July 30, 2010 05:42 PM (AvlwO)

246 127 don't have time to look it up but I"m pretty sure they changed all the citizenship rules during either clinton's administration or bush's.

A friend had to apply for their newborn's American birth certificate cause the kid was born overseas.  It was a pain.  Two American parents, but the kid's citizenship had to be applied for?  My friend kept saying "this is not right, this is not right".  But I could be wrong about some details cause she really wasn't sending out coherent messages at this time, since she was under enormous stess cause there is apparently a time window for this to be done

I'm living in China and married to a Chinese citizen.  When our son was born here, I simply went to the nearest US consulate and filled out the necessary paperwork to register our son as a US  citizen.  A few weeks later, we received his US passport, so now he's a US citizen.  It was a fairly painless procedure.

Now, we have had much more trouble obtaining approval for a  nonimmigrant visa for my wife to visit the US.  But interestingly enough, it was easier to receive the immigrant visa/green card (just more procedural hoops to jump through).

Posted by: Chinaacid at July 30, 2010 07:34 PM (g/EUm)

247

This is a con-job.

Sure, he can say no more anchor babies...

But after amnesty, there will be nobody here illegally, hence, no more anchor babies anyway.

Posted by: Harvey at July 30, 2010 08:26 PM (0S/FC)

Posted by: Windows プロダクトキー at June 14, 2011 10:49 PM (Z9uo6)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
231kb generated in CPU 0.14, elapsed 0.1696 seconds.
62 queries taking 0.0542 seconds, 435 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.