What should be done about illegal immigration?

Both my experience as an observer in my lifetime and my experience of reading history tell me that the power of incumbency as it has become in our times is so great that only immediate and clear disaster can sink a party in power. It appears that voters make up their minds (most of them) in the last few months before a national election, and in the last few weeks in Congressional races. The power of incumbency has grown in my lifetime, and the Democrats are as guilty as the Republicans, because whatever party is in power, the party out of power goes along with any policies or laws which benefit incumbency--the party out of power wishing to take advantage in the future.

Barring a disasterous series of events which tar all Republicans with the same brush, it is unlikely that they will lose their majority in the House. The Senate is up for grabs, but only because the Republicans have not managed to establish a solid majority there (a majority of a few votes is not reliable). Illegal immigration will only be an issue which can sink the Republican party if, in the last few months of this coming autumn, and in the last few months of the autumn of 2008, it is still a major hot button issue--and the Republicans are seen as being dishonest on the issue right across the board. Republicans losing some seats in areas in which there is large support for illegal immigrants won't capture the House for the Democrats. Senate seats are even more problematic in regard to single issues because it is rare that all the citizens of a state hold the same opinion on an issue of national interest. Democrats will decide from one district to another whether or not the constituency to which they hope to appeal will consider this an issue of such significance; Democratic Senate hopefuls may well leave the issue alone if they perceive that opinion is divided in the states in which they run.

I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade--i am pointing out that the power of incumbency has become so great, that it is rare that all the members of either party will suffer right across the board from the dynamics of any heated public debate.

0 Replies

Set, That's not rain, but a shower. We need to be informed of all possibilities to consider all the pros and cons for ourselves. Your opinion has merit, even though I may disagree with parts of your conclusion.

0 Replies

Even before Bush's speech, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) questioned not only how the plan would work but also how it would be funded.[/color] He said it would cost at least $2 billion to deploy the additional troops and rejected the White House idea to pay for it with $1.9 billion in border security funding that the Senate passed as part of a new emergency spending bill for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. White House officials said it is unclear how much the program would cost.

0 Replies

Are conservatives absolutely sure Bush is one?

0 Replies

Bush loves to throw money at problems, but they always seem to be wasted and ineffectual for the purpose for which it was to be funded.

0 Replies

Quote:

You are projecting again, Foxfyre. Just because someone opposes Bush's policy deosn't mean she or he hates him. Does railing obsessively against mexican immigration make you a racist?

You have claimed before that it does.

0 Replies

And this from NewsMax:

Schwarzenegger: Troops a 'Band-Aid' Solution

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger says President Bush's proposal to send 6,000 National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border leaves many questions unanswered.

In a statement after Bush outlined his plan Monday, Schwarzenegger said governors in border states had not been consulted about the plan.

0 Replies

CNN with Lou Dobbs is going to be addressing the illegal immigration issue with a congressman. NEXT. It's now 3:14PM PST

0 Replies

We don't know and probably will not know how the military feels about this new assignment. Their job requires them to simply say "Yes, sir." As a veteran, I understand that.
But I would bet that, privately, they are not real happy about it.
Senior military people, I think, are very, very reticent about committing troups to domestic issues. (I wrote about that after Katrina and Rita. The 82nd Airborne and the 101st Airborne-my old unit-could have been deployed much, much earlier). But I digress.
The plan, as I understand it, is to have 6000 National Guard members along the border but THEY WOULD ROTATE IN AND OUT EVERY THREE WEEKS. The travel time and cost, the inprocessing and outprocessing, the constant retraining. Does it make any sense?
Is this really a plan that makes any sense at all?

0 Replies

realjohnboy wrote:

We don't know and probably will not know how the military feels about this new assignment. Their job requires them to simply say "Yes, sir." As a veteran, I understand that.
But I would bet that, privately, they are not real happy about it.
Senior military people, I think, are very, very reticent about committing troups to domestic issues. (I wrote about that after Katrina and Rita. The 82nd Airborne and the 101st Airborne-my old unit-could have been deployed much, much earlier). But I digress.
The plan, as I understand it, is to have 6000 National Guard members along the border but THEY WOULD ROTATE IN AND OUT EVERY THREE WEEKS. The travel time and cost, the inprocessing and outprocessing, the constant retraining. Does it make any sense?
Is this really a plan that makes any sense at all?

If the Guard was there to stop an illegal invasion of our country, then it would make more sense. But it is my understanding they are just there as observors to report any illegal activity they see to the border guards. In my opinion, this is a poor use of trained military personnel and it does not make any sense to me if I understand it correctly. I say let the civilian Minutemen do that duty on a volunteer basis as they have been doing and give them an official proclamation of recognition and appreciation.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

I say let the civilian Minutemen do that duty on a volunteer basis as they have been doing and give them an official proclamation of recognition and appreciation.

Hmm, good point.

Quote:

The United States is being invaded across our southern border.

And someone really has to stop such:

Quote:

Our fragile National Monuments, National Wildlife Refuges, National Parks, and National Forests along the U.S. southern border are being annihilated.

redirected from the minuteman website to Desert Invasion US

Still wondering why two TSA officers asked my questions in Spanish when departing from Albuquerque's International Sunport ...

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
I say let the civilian Minutemen do that duty on a volunteer basis as they have been doing and give them an official proclamation of recognition and appreciation.

Hmm, good point.

Quote:
The United States is being invaded across our southern border.

And someone really has to stop such:

Quote:
Our fragile National Monuments, National Wildlife Refuges, National Parks, and National Forests along the U.S. southern border are being annihilated.

redirected from the minuteman website to Desert Invasion US

Still wondering why two TSA officers asked my questions in Spanish when departing from Albuquerque's International Sunport ...

Umm please specify which are my statements and which are not when you make a post like this Walter. You make it look like I said all those statements. I didn't.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Umm please specify which are my statements and which are not when you make a post like this Walter. You make it look like I said all those statements. I didn't.

Two quotes are from

Walter Hinteler wrote:

redirected from the minuteman website to Desert Invasion US

Your quotation is marked as

Quote:

Foxfyre wrote:

Sorry that that seems to have been unclear.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:

Umm please specify which are my statements and which are not when you make a post like this Walter. You make it look like I said all those statements. I didn't.

Two quotes are from

Walter Hinteler wrote:
redirected from the minuteman website to Desert Invasion US

Your quotation is marked as

Quote:
Foxfyre wrote:

Sorry that that seems to have been unclear.

It's okay. I have enough problem deflecting the flames thrown at what I DO post without having to defend what I didn't post. Smile

0 Replies

Foxfyre...I reckon I have no ploblem with folks volunteering to help out the Border Patrol. There is a precedent for that in my city and in, I am sure, many others. It is called the Neighborhood Watch Program in which people look for and report "suspicious" activity to the police. The police then decide whether the purported activity is worthy of investigation. The volunteer must do nothing more than report what he/she observed.
If volunteers want to help the Border Patrol by sitting in a room watching camera monitors, or sit in a truck in the middle of nowhere, fine. But that is all they should do and they must not be armed. No way can they be armed. The guns and the name they chose for themselves comes very close to crossing the line between volunteerism and vigilantism.
As for your suggestion, Foxfyre, that this group be singled out for an "official proclamation of recognition and appreciation." Nonsense. A lot of people in the US contrbute time (our Rescue Squad is all-volunteer, for example) and many of us contribute money.
I get the feeling that your call for an official proclamation is motivated by some sort of political agenda?

0 Replies

realjohnboy wrote:

I get the feeling that your call for an official proclamation is motivated by some sort of political agenda?

Na, really, she never would.

I allege that Foxfyre has only ... ehem, honest motives.

0 Replies

realjohnboy wrote:

Foxfyre...I reckon I have no ploblem with folks volunteering to help out the Border Patrol. There is a precedent for that in my city and in, I am sure, many others. It is called the Neighborhood Watch Program in which people look for and report "suspicious" activity to the police. The police then decide whether the purported activity is worthy of investigation. The volunteer must do nothing more than report what he/she observed.
If volunteers want to help the Border Patrol by sitting in a room watching camera monitors, or sit in a truck in the middle of nowhere, fine. But that is all they should do and they must not be armed. No way can they be armed. The guns and the name they chose for themselves comes very close to crossing the line between volunteerism and vigilantism.
As for your suggestion, Foxfyre, that this group be singled out for an "official proclamation of recognition and appreciation." Nonsense. A lot of people in the US contrbute time (our Rescue Squad is all-volunteer, for example) and many of us contribute money.
I get the feeling that your call for an official proclamation is motivated by some sort of political agenda?

Political Agenda? Not at all. Has your Rescue Squad or Neighborhood Watch program been denounced on public TV as the Minutemen have been? Have they been publicly characterized as vigilantes by the President of the United States as the Minutemen have been?

My statement was purely a wish for these people to be recognized as patriots, not villains, and to be encouraged, not defamed.

There is no account anywhere that I know of that the Minutemen have used their guns inappropriately either as a threat or as a weapon. With them out on a lonely desert terrain with nothing but rattlesnakes and possible bandits or coyotes (the two-legged variety) within miles, I have no problem with them having a means of self defense. And anyway, a substantial show of force is the best insurance that it will not be necessary to use force. And their guns are legal.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

realjohnboy wrote:

I get the feeling that your call for an official proclamation is motivated by some sort of political agenda?

Na, really, she never would.

I allege that Foxfyre has only ... ehem, honest motives.

Would you care to describe my motives, Walter, since you assume authority to analyze them? Please provide links.

0 Replies

I've no authority at all.

Especially not when confronted with the "wish for these people to be recognized as patriots, not villains, and to be encouraged, not defamed".

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

I've no authority at all.

Especially not when confronted with the "wish for these people to be recognized as patriots, not villains, and to be encouraged, not defamed".

You'll have to explain better what you mean by that because I have no clue.

0 Replies

What should be done about illegal immigration?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know