Butrflynet wrote:LoneStarMadam wrote:Bottom line, again, they broke the law as soon as they put their wet feet on US soil., or their bare feet, or scratched feet, whatever, they are illegal & ll the excuses some of you are making for them doesn't change thatact!! Again, what will be the next law that you guys believe is of no matter? How did you feel about the 19 that blew up the WTC? Probaly not much different than you feel about these illegals.
How do you feel about all those killed by people driving illegally while drunk? What about speeders? Do you call the police when you go 5 mph over the speed limit? How about when you see others doing it? Are you making excuses for them?
What planet are you on? What the hell do people speeding and drunk driving have to do with illegal aliens crossing the border in droves? Are you really that clueless? I guess so. Let's start with the difference between legal citizens that are committing illegal acts. That is different than illegal aliens coming across the border, sucking out our hard-earned tax money, squirting out babies, using our hospitals, using our welfare, overcrowding our classrooms, and committing crimes with impunity.
Quote:Why so selective about which broken law to rally behind?
There's spitting on the sidewalk and then there is murder. I question your capacity for rationality if you prescribe qualification by equal outrage over every law.
Quote:It isn't really about a law being broken, now is it? That's just one of the talking points on Rush Limbaugh's essential stacks of stuff from his website.
You are irrevocably uninformed if you actually believe only conservatives are concerned with illegal immigration.
Quote:Americans don't seem to care so much when these "illegals" arrive in America wearing Armani suits, buying Tony real estate, and living lavish lifestyles.
Don't they all? You can always tell one of those Armani-clad illegals with the Tony real estate, especially when they're standing in line to cash their welfare checks or sitting in the emergency room with their kids running up and down the hallways.
Quote:The ones who might arrive to attend university at Yale or "tour America" and then never leave. Those aren't the people that this debate is about, right?
I could reply to this but I might be interrupting an symptomatic episode of Capitalism Derangement Syndrome.
Quote:Why the double standard? Isn't the law just as broken?
I've never really seen the law being so mistreated as when you attempt to structure the word within a question.
Quote:When you hire someone to cut your lawn, or clean your gutters, or do some landscaping, do you ask for papers?
With or without papers, wouldn't the lawn get
just as cut if she didn't? (Sorry, but I couldn't resist)
Quote:How do you plan to pay for locating and returning nearly 12 million people back across the border? What about the children who were brought here by parents and have since assimilated into our society? They're caught in the middle of something through no fault or action of their own. They haven't broken the law, they are here because someone else did. Would you want to be punished for someone else's behavior?
Why stop at 12 million? If people like you had their way, they'd outnumber our established population of U.S. citizens by 2020.
Quote:It's very sad to hear the hate.
Trust us, it's nowhere nearly as sad as hearing the ignorance (in your post).
Quote:I find that talk disgusting and callous and contrary to what I was taught.
At last someone makes a case for home-schooling! If you go to school in another ten years, you may be getting your courses in Spanish.
Quote:I don't like labeling a whole group of people with a negative word like "illegals" as if that is the only thing about them that matters. It dehumanizes them and minimizes the issue.
In your world of political correctness, should we instead call them
documentally challenged?
If someone drove carelessly, then ran over your mother, got arrested and was found to have been driving at twice the legally allowed blood/alchohol level, you would be
negatively dehumanizing the person by calling him a drunk driver. Should we instead call the driver "Coordinately Impaired"?
If a gunman killed someone in cold blood and was tried and convicted, you would be too negatively dehumanizing the person to call them a murderer? Should we instead start calling the perp "Grossly Pro-Bullet"?
We don't call people who speed illegal drivers. They are drivers who were speeding. The vast majority of these people's lives are not illegal. They committed one illegal act.
There is nothing I hate more than characterizing someone with a label. I think it is dehumanizing and is used in a propagandizing way. Just as calling someone stupid because they committed one stupid act, it is a biased portrayal of a human being and distorts the discussion.
Quote:The problems today have a lot more to do with government mismanagement and our citizen's insatiable consumerism than anything bad these paperwork-shirkers did. Immigration is a very complex problem. It is not as simple as picking one or two positive or negative effects of immigration and then saying because of that one thing we ought to do such and such.
I can see that studying these paperwork-shirkers is too complicated for some people but I fully appreciate your suggestion that we start living like the Abyrrigines and stop buying things.
Quote:It's like the blind man touching the elephant in one place and then being absolutely sure he knows what an elephant is.
To me, it's more like turning the horse around and knowing exactly what that is...
Quote:Similar to saying that companies ought to be fined for hiring illegal immigrants. That was tried in Nebraska, and was a notable failure. More Americans did not get jobs, meat prices rose, plants closed putting more Americans out of work, resulting in more rising prices, and overall the town suffered serious economic distress, as a result of the fallout. So it was a bad and simplistic solution to a very complicated issue.
I'm happy that you've so carefully studied the Nebraska example and drawn such a grand-sized conclusion. I didn't realize Nebraska was one of those border states with such an influx of illegal aliens. You've picked such an excellent example to discuss here.
Quote:Simply trying to enforce the existing laws may have serious negative economic repercussions. So, to me, the solution is economic, not political. Unfortunately the decision makers are concerned about re-election in the immediate future, not economic health in the long run. This sets up a difficult situation.
You just said there is too much consumerism. It's one of your last paragraphs. Wouldn't it be therefore good for the United States to suffer economic repercussions. That would stop all that rampant consumerism.
Quote:This decision making is best left to strong economic analysis... looking at the effects of immigrants on hospitals, on the tax system (and there are both negative and positive effects on the tax system, tho most people try to exclude the positive ones), on the price index, on citizen unemployment. Changing any one thing in a precarious pyramid could be disastrous, without understanding how all the pieces fit together.
The decision is best left to border patrol, who have the authority and the means to enforce standing immigration laws. There is plenty of data on the enormous drain of illegal immigrants, even if you do save a dime on a head of lettuce.
