50
   

What should be done about illegal immigration?

 
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Apr, 2007 03:04 pm
This an exerpt from an article in USA today
Deal argues that birthright citizenship is a magnet for many illegal immigrants who use so-called "anchor babies" to establish a U.S. foothold. These U.S.-born children are eligible for government services, and at 21, can petition for their parents' residency.

It also defines the extent of the the problem


http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-04-25-mixed-status_x.htm
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Apr, 2007 03:05 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
I already acknowledged that immigration is featured on Salon.com. Contrary to my reputation, I usually do admit I'm wrong when I can clearly see that I was wrong. I also stick to my guns when I believe I'm right. My friends accept that about me and even tolerate those times when I'm excessively stubborn.


Oh and this is laughably mild for what actually happened IMO (again, do you think old europe doctored the screenshot? What?) but it's better than nothing. And if Google skills are permanently learned, fabulous.

Onward.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Apr, 2007 03:26 pm
sozobe wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
I already acknowledged that immigration is featured on Salon.com. Contrary to my reputation, I usually do admit I'm wrong when I can clearly see that I was wrong. I also stick to my guns when I believe I'm right. My friends accept that about me and even tolerate those times when I'm excessively stubborn.


Oh and this is laughably mild for what actually happened IMO (again, do you think old europe doctored the screenshot? What?) but it's better than nothing. And if Google skills are permanently learned, fabulous.

Onward.


No, I don't think he doctored the screen shot and I also don't think there are likely 30+ thousand references to immigration on Salon.com. I don't know that for sure and I'm not about to go count them. Just operating on logic here. Nor did I call him a liar or accuse him of doctoring the results he produced. I try very hard not to play the 'gotcha' game. He doesn't try very hard not to do that, howver.

But obviously all or all but one number all of us are pulling up here are the wrong numer wouldn't you say? So which of us won the lottery and got the right number if any of us did?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Apr, 2007 03:27 pm
High Seas wrote:
Sorry, Foxfyre, I didn't realize you knew him, but you're mistaken in repeating racism allegations about him.

He simply observed that people who cannot possibly be assimilated even after generations in the country shouldn't be allowed in to begin with.


I will admit to having never heard of him, but, based on this observation alone, he sounds like a wise man.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Apr, 2007 03:32 pm
Different results from different geographical locations. Have a link about that above.

Old europe didn't do anything "wrong" -- neither did you, in your final try (so far as I know), nor did I. But we are all in different geographical regions, and that yielded different results.

Started a longer lecture about how Google works but don't want to take this further off track. Basically, Google indicates that there are PLENTY of mentions of the word "immigration" on salon.com (and, incidentally, zero results for "anchor baby"), and that's all that really matters for the purposes of this discussion.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Apr, 2007 03:32 pm
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
High Seas wrote:
Sorry, Foxfyre, I didn't realize you knew him, but you're mistaken in repeating racism allegations about him.

He simply observed that people who cannot possibly be assimilated even after generations in the country shouldn't be allowed in to begin with.


I will admit to having never heard of him, but, based on this observation alone, he sounds like a wise man.


I'm almost certainly not as familiar with him as HS is, but from what I have read, he does make you think and its hard to quarrel with his logic whether or not you agree with his conclusions. He would almost certainly advise us now to bring in only as many immigrants as can be assimilated into the American culture, and that would be an argument for a reasonable quota system remaining in place. I do think that quota can be significantly increased and I strongly advocate us streamlining the process to make it less of a nightmare for those who immigrate here.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Apr, 2007 03:34 pm
I'm still confused by the variance. I got exactly what Soz got... and suspect Fox is still doing it wrong. How about a screenshot, Fox?


http://img360.imageshack.us/img360/4594/googlesearchme4.jpg
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Apr, 2007 03:41 pm
Don't know how to do a screen shot but what I copied and pasted is what came up.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Apr, 2007 03:47 pm
At least, these results are all the same :wink:

http://i17.tinypic.com/2a5yn0p.jpg
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Apr, 2007 03:51 pm
sozobe wrote:
Basically, Google indicates that there are PLENTY of mentions of the word "immigration" on salon.com (and, incidentally, zero results for "anchor baby"), and that's all that really matters for the purposes of this discussion.
Which is the entire problem with the discussion in the first place. OE's screenshot should have sufficed to any logical person. A discrepancy between 100 and 1,000,000 shouldn't mean jack, in a comparison against ZERO. This steadfast denial of the obvious unless or until you can prove a point beyond the capability of a 5 year old to not get it drives me crazy.

Finn, I agreed with you before; calling people bigots for being anti-immigration is wrong. That's why I only do it when they forward bigoted arguments... or more subtly; deny obvious evidence in favor of the "more credible evidence" from www.stopthespicinvasion.com.

Nimh, while your piece did seem to fit our Foxy quite well, it was just as absurdly hyper partisan in it's separation of tendency between Democrats and Republicans. You really should save that crap for Blatham...
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Apr, 2007 04:03 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Don't know how to do a screen shot but what I copied and pasted is what came up.
Hold down the control key and look in the upper right side above your letter keys for "Print Screen SysRq" or "Prnt Scrn" or something to that effect and hit it.
Next, open a new file in "Paint" (Probably Start/Programs/Accessories/Paint).
Next under Edit, select Paste.
Next, under File, select "save as" give it a name, and be sure choose JPEG where it says Save as Type.

You can now make screenshots of whatever you wish. This will come in handy, so learn it or at least save the instructions. Let me know if you don't know how to load pics to imageshack.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Apr, 2007 04:13 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Don't know how to do a screen shot but what I copied and pasted is what came up.
Hold down the control key and look in the upper right side above your letter keys for "Print Screen SysRq" or "Prnt Scrn" or something to that effect and hit it.
Next, open a new file in "Paint" (Probably Start/Programs/Accessories/Paint).
Next under Edit, select Paste.
Next, under File, select "save as" give it a name, and be sure choose JPEG where it says Save as Type.

You can now make screenshots of whatever you wish. This will come in handy, so learn it or at least save the instructions. Let me know if you don't know how to load pics to imageshack.


Good lord. If I ever have to know how to do that I'll come back and ask. I have NEVER claimed to be anything other than a total computer klutz. I've even been quite humbed as to my googling skills (though I rarely use google but rather use another search engine.)
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Apr, 2007 07:10 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
OCCOM BILL wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Don't know how to do a screen shot but what I copied and pasted is what came up.
Hold down the control key and look in the upper right side above your letter keys for "Print Screen SysRq" or "Prnt Scrn" or something to that effect and hit it.
Next, open a new file in "Paint" (Probably Start/Programs/Accessories/Paint).
Next under Edit, select Paste.
Next, under File, select "save as" give it a name, and be sure choose JPEG where it says Save as Type.

You can now make screenshots of whatever you wish. This will come in handy, so learn it or at least save the instructions. Let me know if you don't know how to load pics to imageshack.


Good lord. If I ever have to know how to do that I'll come back and ask. I have NEVER claimed to be anything other than a total computer klutz. I've even been quite humbed as to my googling skills (though I rarely use google but rather use another search engine.)


A piece of honest, friendly advice - Google is so far superior to the other search engines, it isn't even funny.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Apr, 2007 05:54 am
High Seas wrote:
Sorry, Foxfyre, I didn't realize you knew him, but you're mistaken in repeating racism allegations about him.

He simply observed that people who cannot possibly be assimilated even after generations in the country shouldn't be allowed in to begin with.


Well now, old friend, 'observes' is probably the wrong word to use for a value judgement. Aside from that, I cannot think of a nation which doesn't have this circumstance as a fact of life. Further, there seems to be no good reason at all to consider the circumstance a negative outside of a presumption that, either, one heritage/culture is superior or that the 'orderliness' which is seen or assumed to arise with cultural singularity is preferable to the 'disorder' that arises from cultural mixing...a notion likely to be voiced most stridently by those who stand to benefit from resisting change in alignments of power, wealth, etc.

America seems a lovely candidate for 'example of the benefits that accrue from mongrelization of everything'. One can take, for example, the incredible flourishing of American music which is so deeply indebted to Jewish culture, African cultlure, European classical music culture, gypsy culture, diverse english folk traditions, christian hymnal traditions, etc.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Apr, 2007 06:01 am
billygoat penned
Quote:
Nimh, while your piece did seem to fit our Foxy quite well, it was just as absurdly hyper partisan in it's separation of tendency between Democrats and Republicans. You really should save that crap for Blatham...


For one brief, bright, shining second...
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Apr, 2007 06:08 am
re Powell: I've seen him in England and noticed how he could fire up the masses.
And polarise.

I still wonder how he could persuade Thatcher to act against the German unification.

Well, actually I don't wonder at all.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Apr, 2007 06:29 am
At five years of age, I engaged an experiment in social power arrangements. I told a farmer who lived next door (he had a lot of property and senior social standing) to "go to hell". The experiment fell out from a sense of injustice that he could freely tell me what to do but that I couldn't freely tell him what to do. As an experiment, it failed in the sense that fifteen minutes later, I was in the woodshed and five minutes after that, I was shackled and in an orange jump suit being uncomfortably dragged by an older brother (practicing his own power experiment) back over to the farmer to demonstrate my abject obeisance.

It's not that I don't like Republicans, it is that I don't like the people who have a zest and enthusiasm for dominance of others. I yearn, in my heart of hearts, to do nasty things to them, perhaps set their armpit hairs alight.

The urge to dominate, in social animals like us, is a fact of life. The balancing resistance to it is another fact of life. The authoritarian type is represented in that first fact and the anarchist/libertarian type (not to mention the value set of the US constitution and bill of rights) is represented in the second fact.

But that's not to say I don't like Republicans. Just lots of the people who become them.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Apr, 2007 08:44 am
blatham wrote:
At five years of age, I engaged an experiment in social power arrangements. I told a farmer who lived next door (he had a lot of property and senior social standing) to "go to hell". The experiment fell out from a sense of injustice that he could freely tell me what to do but that I couldn't freely tell him what to do. As an experiment, it failed in the sense that fifteen minutes later, I was in the woodshed and five minutes after that, I was shackled and in an orange jump suit being uncomfortably dragged by an older brother (practicing his own power experiment) back over to the farmer to demonstrate my abject obeisance.

It's not that I don't like Republicans, it is that I don't like the people who have a zest and enthusiasm for dominance of others. I yearn, in my heart of hearts, to do nasty things to them, perhaps set their armpit hairs alight.

The urge to dominate, in social animals like us, is a fact of life. The balancing resistance to it is another fact of life. The authoritarian type is represented in that first fact and the anarchist/libertarian type (not to mention the value set of the US constitution and bill of rights) is represented in the second fact.

But that's not to say I don't like Republicans. Just lots of the people who become them.


Sounds like you still have the same problem with authority that you had as a bratty, immature five year old.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Apr, 2007 01:47 pm
Quote:
Few Border-Crossers Are Prosecuted

Saturday April 7, 2007


By ALICIA A. CALDWELL

Associated Press Writer

EL PASO, Texas (AP) - For all the tough talk out of Washington on immigration, illegal immigrants caught along the Mexican border have almost no reason to fear they will be prosecuted.

Ninety-eight percent of those arrested between Oct. 1, 2000, and Sept. 30, 2005, were never prosecuted for illegally entering the country, according to an Associated Press analysis of federal data. Nearly 5.3 million immigrants were simply escorted back across the Rio Grande and turned loose. Many presumably tried to slip into the U.S. again.

The number of immigrants prosecuted annually tripled during that five-year period, to 30,848 in fiscal year 2005, the most recent figures available. But that still represented less than 3 percent of the 1.17 million people arrested that year. The prosecution rate was just under 1 percent in 2001.

The likelihood of an illegal immigrant being prosecuted is ``to me, practically zero,'' said Kathleen Walker, president-elect of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.

Federal prosecutors along the nation's southern border have come under pressure from politicians and from top officials in the Justice Department to pursue more cases against illegal immigrants.

But few politicians are seriously suggesting the government prosecute everyone caught slipping across the border. With about 1 million immigrants stopped each year, that would overwhelm the nation's prisons, break the Justice Department's budget and paralyze the courts, immigration experts say.

The Justice Department itself says it has higher priorities and too few resources to go after every ordinary illegal immigrant. Instead, the department says it pursues more selective strategies, such as going after immigrant smugglers and immigrants with criminal records.

T.J. Bonner, the union chief for Border Patrol agents, said the most effective solution would be to dry up job opportunities in the U.S. by cracking down on employers who hire illegal immigrants.

``The employers are the ones breaking the law,'' he said, suggesting the creation of an ``idiot-proof'' system to check the immigration status of workers and the prosecution of any employers who knowingly hire those in this country illegally.

``It's much like our tax laws: People don't pay their taxes out of an overriding sense of citizenship; it's a healthy dose of fear,'' Bonner said.

Under federal law, illegally entering the country is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine and up to six months in prison for a first time. A second offense carries up to two years. If an immigrant has been prosecuted and deported and then sneaks back into the country, he can be charged with a felony punishable by up to two years behind bars. Those with criminal records can get 10 to 20 years.

The federal figures on arrests and prosecutions were collected and provided to the AP by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University in New York.

The number of illegal immigrants arrested at the border is dwarfed by the number who make it through. ``For every person we catch, two or three get by us,'' Bonner said.

Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd said in a statement that 30 federal prosecutors have been added to the Southwestern border to handle the rising number of immigration and border drug cases and noted that securing more prosecutions would require hiring more judges and public defenders and building more courtrooms and jails.

Authorities also note that illegal immigrants who make it past the border are not necessarily home free. In the past year, immigration officials have conducted numerous raids on workplaces.

Boyd noted that the Border Patrol can charge illegal immigrants with civil violations punishable by fines of $50 to $250. But Border Patrol officials said most Mexican immigrants are not sent before a judge to be fined.

``The majority are offered and granted ... voluntary removal back to Mexico,'' said Xavier Rios, an assistant chief Border Patrol agent in Washington. ``We don't seek to prosecute everyone.''

Boyd said the Justice Department pursues charges if a case involves human smugglers, if an immigrant has a felony record in the U.S., or if he has been deported before.

``When you consider the other high-priority laws that the department is charged with enforcing, such as drug trafficking, firearms offenses, violent crime, national security, child pornography, and corporate fraud, the department is achieving a balance of immigration enforcement with other important areas,'' Boyd said.

Last month an undated internal Justice Department memo released as part of the congressional investigation of the firings of eight U.S. attorneys revealed that in Texas, most illegal crossers have to be caught at least six times before their case will be forwarded to prosecutors.

Still, some border regions have decided to crack down.

Along the Border Patrol's 210-mile Del Rio sector in West Texas, any illegal immigrant arrested since 2006 is jailed and prosecuted, under a federal project called Operation Streamline. It was briefly repeated along a narrow stretch of border in New Mexico. And Maricopa County, Ariz., officials are using a state anti-smuggling law to prosecute both suspected smugglers and the immigrants who pay them.

Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, a former state judge, said that the prosecution rates amount to ``dereliction of duty'' and that the government should spend whatever it takes to lock up and deport every illegal immigrant.

``Prosecutors should not have the discretion to prosecute some people for violations of the law and not others, that's discriminatory,'' he said.

But Iliana Holguin, executive director of the El Paso Catholic Church's Diocesan Migrant and Refugee Services, said that would mean the government would have to ``massively increase the size of the court system, or it is going to collapse on itself under its own weight.''


http://i13.tinypic.com/333gzna.jpg
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Apr, 2007 02:20 pm
Quote:
Sounds like you still have the same problem with authority that you had as a bratty, immature five year old.


Given the appropriate distinction between the authoritative and the authoritarian, indeed I do. Others may value the matter differently. But I trust it is sufficiently clear that I figure those folks might just as well drop the pretense of being alive and submit themselves to the Dow factory for processing into Hummer floor mats
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 08/19/2025 at 10:07:32