Bad Timing, Bad Policy, Bad Bill

I\'d vote for it. In a heartbeat. I\'m not too preoccupied with Iraq, I just think its good policy. If you\'re worried about the economy protectionism is the wrong way to go. If someone comes to this country and wants my job they have to be ready to outwork me. If they do, God bless them. I\'ll take someone else\'s job.

Patriotic Americans who love their country and would like to see it protected from the \"reconquista\" that is upon us will lobby their congressional representatives to vote against the Kennedy-McCain amnesty.

Stuart… I think that we ought to reinstate Eisenhower\'s mass deportation program that he carried out when he was president. At the same time, we should pass legislation declaring that English is the nation\'s official language, place a five year moratorium on all immigration (legal and illegal so we can sort out who is here), and also address the serious issue of \"anchor babies.\"

An even greater challenge will be to stop the construction of the NAFTA superhighway, the next step on the ladder of a US-Canada-Mexico super state.

I\'m generally in agreement that this law is poorly written, and while I don\'t have a suggestion as to what we should do with the immigration problem, I wouldn\'t support this legislation.

I do, however, disagree with Nathan about English as the national language. While I believe people should speak it out of common sense (Cause 95% of us do), I don\'t like the government telling us what our national language was. If we were intended to have one, our forefathers would have put it into the constitution.

I’d vote for it. In a heartbeat. I’m not too preoccupied with Iraq, I just think its good policy. If you’re worried about the economy protectionism is the wrong way to go. If someone comes to this country and wants my job they have to be ready to outwork me. If they do, God bless them. I’ll take someone else’s job.

Patriotic Americans who love their country and would like to see it protected from the “reconquista” that is upon us will lobby their congressional representatives to vote against the Kennedy-McCain amnesty.

Stuart… I think that we ought to reinstate Eisenhower’s mass deportation program that he carried out when he was president. At the same time, we should pass legislation declaring that English is the nation’s official language, place a five year moratorium on all immigration (legal and illegal so we can sort out who is here), and also address the serious issue of “anchor babies.”

An even greater challenge will be to stop the construction of the NAFTA superhighway, the next step on the ladder of a US-Canada-Mexico super state.

I’m generally in agreement that this law is poorly written, and while I don’t have a suggestion as to what we should do with the immigration problem, I wouldn’t support this legislation.

I do, however, disagree with Nathan about English as the national language. While I believe people should speak it out of common sense (Cause 95% of us do), I don’t like the government telling us what our national language was. If we were intended to have one, our forefathers would have put it into the constitution.

\"Supporters present it as a compromise, promising improved border security in exchange for amnesty, just like in 1986. Also, like in 1986 that improved security will likely never happen.\"

Above is my main concern with regard to reform. Tighten the border, enforce the laws on the books now, then we can talk about what to do with the rest of it. Yet, \"enforcement first\" gets the bad rap that it is somehow \"racist\" or \"xenophobic.\" This gets my bowels in an uproar not just because the labelling is dishonest, but that ultimately border enforcement and internal enforcement are the last things these \"elected\" life time employees want.

And where exactly have YOU been? Amnesty? Call it: regularization, legalization, normalization, permanence, earned adjustment or phased-in access to earned regularization.

Amnesty is just so…honest

This is exactly the type of xenaphobic arguments that i\'ve come to expect from conservatives. What are you really afraid of? That some Mexican migrant might be able to do your job better than you or I can?

Free market economies need immigrants to do the jobs that American\'s don\'t want. The more documented and legal aliens we have in this country, the more in taxes that they pay which in turn goes to support the very programs your depending on in the future.

I\'m so tired of this argument it\'s frightening. Instead of complaining about it, why don\'t conservatives come up with a better plan than building a 900 mile fence. Are we going to wall our country in and say no to anyone that may want to live here? Second, how do you propose to ship 12 million people out of this country? Where\'s the logic in that plan.

What conservatives like you and Tom Tancredo are really arguing is for more regulation. The fight to deport 12 million people and stop illegal immigration is a value proposition that ultimately rejects the free market ideology that you supposedly espouse.

Democrats and liberals, while not always in agreement, at least use rationality and common sense when they propose legislation.

Doug and Tony seem to think (illegal) immigration is about workers being \"better\" than American workers. Wrong focus. It\'s that they\'re CHEAPER. And, since there is essentially an unlimited number of would-be immigrants who are eager to come here and willing to do virtually anything to do it, how long does DOUG really think he\'d keep his job AT HIS CURRENT WAGES no matter how long and hard HE works? Wait until there are several hundred guys lined up for it, all eager to cut his throat. And should either of these guys EMPLOY illegal labor as well may be the case, well, they\'re cheats and lawbreakers who seek to gain an advantage over their competition through dishonest means. If they are running a company legally, they may well find themselves competing against companies that can undercut them because they employ illegal labor.

And Tony, would legal status suddenly give an illegal alien with a 2nd grade education the ability to move out of the working poor? Funny how poverty rates among Hispanics have increased since the 1986 amnesty. Also, note the high rate of drop outs among Hispanic youth, and the increasing rate of unwed pregnancies among Latinas–both the highest for any ethnic/racial group.

I have no issue with immigration; it\'s kind of how we got to where we are as a nation.

Concerns about a \"Mexican Migrant\" or \"Mexican Immigrant\" is one thing, note the lack of the use \"illegal\" in there. They\'re all the same to Liberals, which is the part of problem. Order is kind of a useful tool in government and one would think this would be easy to agree on, it is however, impossible which is where terminology like: regularization, legalization, normalization, permanence, earned adjustment or phased-in access to earned regularization, comes into play. Obviously they see something wrong with it or they wouldn\'t play with the language as they do.

Another Liberal argument (I guess Bush is one too), is that you can\'t deport the estimated 12 million (ILLEGAL) migrants/immigrants. Just like you cannot expect them to leave of their own volition and return following some to the rules put forth by Tedward and McCain. Bottom line is how does one work or communicate with estimates? We\'re not even sure how many there are actually here, because we don\'t have a flippin\' clue about our border.

I don\'t count estimates when I can\'t get to sleep, I use sheep. It doesn\'t matter how wonderful a plan like the KM bill is if one refuses to see that leaving the door open allows more estimates in, which again cannot be counted, only estimated.

Locking the door is NOT xenophobic, it\'s part of getting a clue as to what we are dealing with. Maybe the estimates are off by 11,999,900 and their are only 100 of them and there is no problem. No ones bill can account for the REALITY that the numbers are not hard numbers.

Sorry, but it was my understanding there would be no math.

“Supporters present it as a compromise, promising improved border security in exchange for amnesty, just like in 1986. Also, like in 1986 that improved security will likely never happen.”

Above is my main concern with regard to reform. Tighten the border, enforce the laws on the books now, then we can talk about what to do with the rest of it. Yet, “enforcement first” gets the bad rap that it is somehow “racist” or “xenophobic.” This gets my bowels in an uproar not just because the labelling is dishonest, but that ultimately border enforcement and internal enforcement are the last things these “elected” life time employees want.

And where exactly have YOU been? Amnesty? Call it: regularization, legalization, normalization, permanence, earned adjustment or phased-in access to earned regularization.

Amnesty is just so…honest

I prefer to call it the Mafia, controlling America.

This is exactly the type of xenaphobic arguments that i’ve come to expect from conservatives. What are you really afraid of? That some Mexican migrant might be able to do your job better than you or I can?

Free market economies need immigrants to do the jobs that American’s don’t want. The more documented and legal aliens we have in this country, the more in taxes that they pay which in turn goes to support the very programs your depending on in the future.

I’m so tired of this argument it’s frightening. Instead of complaining about it, why don’t conservatives come up with a better plan than building a 900 mile fence. Are we going to wall our country in and say no to anyone that may want to live here? Second, how do you propose to ship 12 million people out of this country? Where’s the logic in that plan.

What conservatives like you and Tom Tancredo are really arguing is for more regulation. The fight to deport 12 million people and stop illegal immigration is a value proposition that ultimately rejects the free market ideology that you supposedly espouse.

Democrats and liberals, while not always in agreement, at least use rationality and common sense when they propose legislation.

Actually, Ali, you\'re wrong. No smart employer looks for the cheapest labor, it\'s the most productive defined as output per unit of cost. If you can produce $50 per hour in value and a competitor can do $40 most employers will hire you for $45 even if your competitor will work for 40. Frankly, that\'s why there still are jobs in the U.S. and also why economists aren\'t sure if illegal labor raises or lowers the real wages of workers or whether it increases or decreases the job supply for legitimate workers. That\'s what I meant by better. More productive.

I have 35 employees every one of whom I could replace with someone else cheaper and put myself out of business in the process. I spend most of my day trying to figure out how to raise the wages of the people under me. Those employers who just want the cheapest possible labor without considering productivity are mostly out of business already.

I\'m neither a Democrat nor a liberal but I agree with Tony on his free trade argument. The fact is in the economy conservatives said we wanted and now have, you can move the job as easily as the worker. Keeping foreign workers in foreign countries and moving a factory there hurts the US economy a lot more than foreign workers coming here.

Lastly, I agree with Blandly Urbane that shutting down the border is not racist or xenophobic. But, if we make it easy for foreign workers to come in and work legally, securing the border gets a lot easier because the only people who will need to sneak across it will be smugglers and people who come here for the purpose of crime. If the point is national security, McCain-Feingold or something like it is smarter than enforcement first.

Doug and Tony seem to think (illegal) immigration is about workers being “better” than American workers. Wrong focus. It’s that they’re CHEAPER. And, since there is essentially an unlimited number of would-be immigrants who are eager to come here and willing to do virtually anything to do it, how long does DOUG really think he’d keep his job AT HIS CURRENT WAGES no matter how long and hard HE works? Wait until there are several hundred guys lined up for it, all eager to cut his throat. And should either of these guys EMPLOY illegal labor as well may be the case, well, they’re cheats and lawbreakers who seek to gain an advantage over their competition through dishonest means. If they are running a company legally, they may well find themselves competing against companies that can undercut them because they employ illegal labor.

And Tony, would legal status suddenly give an illegal alien with a 2nd grade education the ability to move out of the working poor? Funny how poverty rates among Hispanics have increased since the 1986 amnesty. Also, note the high rate of drop outs among Hispanic youth, and the increasing rate of unwed pregnancies among Latinas–both the highest for any ethnic/racial group.

I have no issue with immigration; it’s kind of how we got to where we are as a nation.

Concerns about a “Mexican Migrant” or “Mexican Immigrant” is one thing, note the lack of the use “illegal” in there. They’re all the same to Liberals, which is the part of problem. Order is kind of a useful tool in government and one would think this would be easy to agree on, it is however, impossible which is where terminology like: regularization, legalization, normalization, permanence, earned adjustment or phased-in access to earned regularization, comes into play. Obviously they see something wrong with it or they wouldn’t play with the language as they do.

Another Liberal argument (I guess Bush is one too), is that you can’t deport the estimated 12 million (ILLEGAL) migrants/immigrants. Just like you cannot expect them to leave of their own volition and return following some to the rules put forth by Tedward and McCain. Bottom line is how does one work or communicate with estimates? We’re not even sure how many there are actually here, because we don’t have a flippin’ clue about our border.

I don’t count estimates when I can’t get to sleep, I use sheep. It doesn’t matter how wonderful a plan like the KM bill is if one refuses to see that leaving the door open allows more estimates in, which again cannot be counted, only estimated.

Locking the door is NOT xenophobic, it’s part of getting a clue as to what we are dealing with. Maybe the estimates are off by 11,999,900 and their are only 100 of them and there is no problem. No ones bill can account for the REALITY that the numbers are not hard numbers.

Sorry, but it was my understanding there would be no math.

Actually, Ali, you’re wrong. No smart employer looks for the cheapest labor, it’s the most productive defined as output per unit of cost. If you can produce $50 per hour in value and a competitor can do $40 most employers will hire you for $45 even if your competitor will work for 40. Frankly, that’s why there still are jobs in the U.S. and also why economists aren’t sure if illegal labor raises or lowers the real wages of workers or whether it increases or decreases the job supply for legitimate workers. That’s what I meant by better. More productive.

I have 35 employees every one of whom I could replace with someone else cheaper and put myself out of business in the process. I spend most of my day trying to figure out how to raise the wages of the people under me. Those employers who just want the cheapest possible labor without considering productivity are mostly out of business already.

I’m neither a Democrat nor a liberal but I agree with Tony on his free trade argument. The fact is in the economy conservatives said we wanted and now have, you can move the job as easily as the worker. Keeping foreign workers in foreign countries and moving a factory there hurts the US economy a lot more than foreign workers coming here.

Lastly, I agree with Blandly Urbane that shutting down the border is not racist or xenophobic. But, if we make it easy for foreign workers to come in and work legally, securing the border gets a lot easier because the only people who will need to sneak across it will be smugglers and people who come here for the purpose of crime. If the point is national security, McCain-Feingold or something like it is smarter than enforcement first.

Doug and Tony,

This has nothing to do with xenaphobia, and if you believe it does, you haven\'t been reading the arguments very closely. This instead has to do with Americansim, and what is best for the entire nation.

This country (or any nation) has the right to determine who comes and why. There is a legal process in place that is in the best interest of Americans. We choose not to enforce the legal process, and instead opt for excessive immigration.

If people want to come here, that is fine. They should be forced to do so legally and to the letter of the law. The 900 miles of fence is not a silly idea. In fact, we ought to place American troops on the border and urge them to use force if necessary to repel the invasion from the south.

This is about reconquista, economic take-over, and the destruction of the sovereign United States. We need to know who is coming here and why– free trade aside– this about whether or not the American people want to live in a nation of laws or a nation of law breaking intruders who are uninvited and unwanted.

Brave patriots like Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan, the Minutemen, and the Team America PAC understand this. They also understand that our cultural assimilation of these people who come into the nation either legally or illegally is poor. We ought to demand that immigration tests are more difficult and comprehensive– this isn\'t a country club, it is a nation… our nation.

We also ought to immediately declare that English i the official language of America and that all government business (ballots, forms, court proceedings, public schools, etc) be conducted in English only.

Just a few thoughts…

I appreciate the fact that many want a \"guest-worker\" program and on the <i>surface</i> I don\'t see a major issue with it.

That said, ultimately my main concern is what are we going to end up with when \"immigration reforms\" have been made?

Our gov. hasn\'t done much in the way with regard to the last \"reform,\" unless you consider ignoring and thwarting it as necessary as doing something, which I guess is doing something.

Who is to say our politicians will honor this immigration package? I want the door locked before ANYTHING takes place….good luck, right?

Shrader said, \"This country (or any nation) has the right to determine who comes and why. There is a legal process in place that is in the best interest of Americans.\"

Hmmmmm, odd that he would think WE have the right to do as everyone else does. How dare we!

I appreciate the fact that many want a “guest-worker” program and on the surface I don’t see a major issue with it.

That said, ultimately my main concern is what are we going to end up with when “immigration reforms” have been made?

Our gov. hasn’t done much in the way with regard to the last “reform,” unless you consider ignoring and thwarting it as necessary as doing something, which I guess is doing something.

Who is to say our politicians will honor this immigration package? I want the door locked before ANYTHING takes place….good luck, right?

Shrader said, “This country (or any nation) has the right to determine who comes and why. There is a legal process in place that is in the best interest of Americans.”

Hmmmmm, odd that he would think WE have the right to do as everyone else does. How dare we!

This may be why I don\'t understand conservatives. I hear the language, but I don\'t get it. It\'s like your speaking Swahili to me or something.

Immigration isn\'t a values issue. It\'s an economic issue and a global issue. Economically speaking, the jobs that hire the cheapest labor, for the most part have already left the country and are operating in China, India or South Korea. The United States has shifted from an industrial society to an information society to a knowledge economy.

If we close our borders to the rest of the world ande implement strict immigration control procedures, then we as a country risk becoming second-rate. An \"America First\" attitude, while great for photo ops, has no place in a world where interdependence is becoming common place. The policies of yester-year (closing our borders) is not the solution to the problems we face and will face.

One other note to Ali - your comment on Latino\'s/Latina\'s should be more carefully worded. That particular ethnic group is not the only migrant group in America that faces the growing problem of \"illegitimacy\". You could easily apply those comments to any ethnic group, caucasion, hispanic, black, slav\'s, russians and any other group.

Tony– \"America First\" should be the only consideration when we elect candidates, vote on public policy, or determine the laws of the land.

\"Interdependence\" is a false idol… it is the tool of the one-worlders, internationalists, and anti-Americans that is used to help usurp the sovereignty of the United States (and other nation states around the world).

We do not pledge allegiance to the flag of Mexico, nor should we encourage immigration policies which are better for Mexico than for the United States. Immigration is the values issue–candidates who support increased immigration without taking a step back to see who is coming here and why need to be booted from office!

Most importantly, we do not live in an economy… we live in a country… a country handed down to us from people who stood for certain values and the rule of law. Handing off the sovereignty of this nation by weakening the borders and allowing lawless individuals to have an \"amnesty\" is simply not a viable concept.

This may be why I don’t understand conservatives. I hear the language, but I don’t get it. It’s like your speaking Swahili to me or something.

Immigration isn’t a values issue. It’s an economic issue and a global issue. Economically speaking, the jobs that hire the cheapest labor, for the most part have already left the country and are operating in China, India or South Korea. The United States has shifted from an industrial society to an information society to a knowledge economy.

If we close our borders to the rest of the world ande implement strict immigration control procedures, then we as a country risk becoming second-rate. An “America First” attitude, while great for photo ops, has no place in a world where interdependence is becoming common place. The policies of yester-year (closing our borders) is not the solution to the problems we face and will face.

One other note to Ali - your comment on Latino’s/Latina’s should be more carefully worded. That particular ethnic group is not the only migrant group in America that faces the growing problem of “illegitimacy”. You could easily apply those comments to any ethnic group, caucasion, hispanic, black, slav’s, russians and any other group.

Tony– “America First” should be the only consideration when we elect candidates, vote on public policy, or determine the laws of the land.

“Interdependence” is a false idol… it is the tool of the one-worlders, internationalists, and anti-Americans that is used to help usurp the sovereignty of the United States (and other nation states around the world).

We do not pledge allegiance to the flag of Mexico, nor should we encourage immigration policies which are better for Mexico than for the United States. Immigration is the values issue–candidates who support increased immigration without taking a step back to see who is coming here and why need to be booted from office!

Most importantly, we do not live in an economy… we live in a country… a country handed down to us from people who stood for certain values and the rule of law. Handing off the sovereignty of this nation by weakening the borders and allowing lawless individuals to have an “amnesty” is simply not a viable concept.