ptown_trojans_1 wrote:

tk421 wrote:

CenterBHSFan wrote:

majorspark wrote: Also I don't give two shits what a foreign government thinks of our domestic policy.[/b]

The Mexicans also don't have much to talk when it comes to illegal immigration in their country. It is a felony in Mexico and they deport more illegals than the US.

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/mexicos-tough-anti-immigration-laws

You aren't alone in those sentiments.

Agreed. I don't give a crap what anyone else outside the U.S. thinks about our country. W

Ugh, I can't this point of view. Whether you like it or not, the way the U.S. acts domestically does impact the way the U.S. power is perceived abroad. Why do you think countries could not stand the U.S. during the Bush years, cause we did stuff in 2002-2006 to tick them off. It is really hard to maintain economic, counterrorism, nonproliferation policies if we act stupid and tick off allies.

Also, I'm not sure we should be ticking off one of our largest trading partners either.

As much as they suck, we need Mexico to secure their parts of the border, to work with our DHS, Border patrol, ICE, etc. To send their military to subdue the lawless areas. We tick them off, we are on our own and can only defend 50% of the problem.

We can't do it alone. Saying, screw everyone else ignores the connectiveness of the world economy and world foreign policy issues.

if you were talking about Canada, i would agree. however we are talking about a really corrupt mexico. most of the people they have guarding the border are problem providing assistance to those who cross.

Glory Days wrote:

if you were talking about Canada, i would agree. however we are talking about a really corrupt mexico. most of the people they have guarding the border are problem providing assistance to those who cross.

More reason not to piss them off and instead work with them.

Replace Mexico with Pakistan and you have our problem with Afg/Pak. We don't say screw you Pakistan, instead we reach out and work with them.

And none of our dudes are helping people across the border...

BCBulldog wrote:

Footwedge wrote: An excellent article from Justin Raimondo who discusses the situation from a libertarian perspective.

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2010/04/27/south-of-the-border/

Damn good article. One thing that concerns me is his desire to cut-and-run from Afghanistan. If we learned anything with Iraq over the last 40 years, it is that we can't just leave terrorists to their own devices unless we want to deal with the negative results in the future. Regardless, there is more that must be done to secure our southern border. I don't think most Americans realize how dangerous the cartels are. The Mexican government may be on the verge of collapse.

I'm confused by the Iraq comment. What did we learn or do you think we should learn? Also, did you really mean 40 years? Because we were allies with Saddam in the early and mid-80's.

I Wear Pants wrote:

dwccrew wrote:

majorspark wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote: You realize that the "real Americans" back then were using the same arguments that people are today? "They're lazy/unwashed/dirty/diseased/criminal scum/taking our jobs.". Literally the same arguments have been used against immigration since the country got off it's feet. I doubt many Mexicans are crawling through the desert, hoping fences, and wading rivers to get into the country simply to sit on their asses and do nothing.

True, but many of those in the past you refer to entered legally. No matter what ones motivation we have to have order. We have laws, we consider some stupid but we still obey them. We should expect the same obedience to reasonable laws of those who want to integrate into our society.

Agreed.

Pants- As I stated previously, the illegals are a drain on our economy and it is ridiculous and a slap in the face of those who have entered legally to compare them.

CenterBHSFan wrote: The difference between our American ancestors who were immigrants and illegal aliens is this:

Our ancestors wanted to spend all their money here and invest their future into America. They wanted to buy a home to raise their family in. In essence, they wanted the "American Dream".

Today's illegals (by and large) want to send the vast majority of their money back to their home country. They only want to invest enough money to pay their 15 part share of the rent and enough food to get by. They have no intention of buying homes. They have no intention of going through the process, which is our law, of becoming American citizens. They are here to get what they can get for X amount of years and then they go home.
My heart doesn't bleed for those people.

I agree with this post too.

Another huge problem is the drug trade associated with the open borders and illegals. Not all illegals are involved with the drug trade, but the border security is an issue and they will get caught as well.

Legalize and regulate drugs and you solve that last problem.

I agree with the legalization of drugs, but I don't think the government should have much to do with the regulation. Maybe establish some guidelines such as age limits, no operating vehicles under the influence. Other than that, tax it and sit back and let the free market regulate it.

CenterBHSFan wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote:

Glory Days wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote: Legalize and regulate drugs and you solve that last problem.

you're right, the cartels would just close up shop and give up. wow, i didnt know it was that simple.

There wouldn't be the need for people to grow/make the shit in a different country then and sneak it across the border.

Why grow weed in Mexico and have some dude sneak it across the border and have it distributed by shady, violent motherfuckers when you can just grow it on a farm near your location and sell it to a distributor?

Because it would more than likely still be cheaper coming from Mexico than anything you would be able to buy in America, even if you grew it yourself (taxes)

I doubt they'd tax you for growing it unless you were distributing it. Now I could see them requiring a growing license, which in a sense is a tax, but that would be difficult to regulate since people grow illegally now without getting caught.

Also, even if it was coming from Mexico and was cheaper, so what? It would still be legal, it'd be no different than items that are assembled in Mexico now and sold here in the US. It being legal would eliminate a lot of violence because the price would go down and it would not be nearly as profitable.

Plus, I'm sure corporate America would figure out how to corner the market and make money off of it.

I compare it to bootlegging during prohibition. Once alcohol was legal again, the violence associated with bootlegging subsided.

Glory Days wrote: not to mention, its the cartels way of life. they just arent going to stop something they have been doing since before most of us were born. they'll find something else, or like posted above, sell it cheaper than the taxed legal stuff.

I agree that they would find something else to sell, but it would be a huge blow to them and their power. Alos, they couldn't sell it cheaper, it wouldn't be profitable. The reason they make so much money is because it is illegal.

majorspark wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote: Legalize and regulate drugs and you solve that last problem.

I understand your point. I lean towards personal liberty as well. But something to think about, just because something is legal does not mean men will not seek control of it. History is full of people killing people over legal commodities. Oil is a recent example. Turning regulation over to the government does not guarantee a solution to the problem. No entity on this earth has killed more people on this earth in order to gain control of a resource or commodity than that of government. Many governments in history make the drug cartels look like piss ants.

Bingo!!!!

I Wear Pants wrote: I get that but I don't think that the example applies to the drug debate. I really don't see a scenario where legalizing and regulating the drug industry would result in more or even as much violence than there currently is.

But we digress...back to talking about how the filthy, lazy, Mexicans are ruining the country.

What a broad statement. No one here is claiming that Mexicans are ruining the country, we are saying that a majority of ILLEGAL immigrants are a drain on the resources of this country. If someone, whether they are mexican, cuban, whatever; enters the country legally, I invite them with open arms. If they enter illegally they deserve nothing from us except a ride back to the border to go home. They don't even deserve that.

I Wear Pants wrote: And none of our dudes are helping people across the border...

No one is saying that they don't. They are criminals as well and should be prosecuted.

That's what I mean by regulation.

And I find it hilarious that the same people bitching about the strain the illegals are on the economy have no problem with spending trillions on wars abroad.

I Wear Pants wrote: That's what I mean by regulation.

And I find it hilarious that the same people bitching about the strain the illegals are on the economy have no problem with spending trillions on wars abroad.

I really hope you weren't referring to me in this post (since you were addressing me in the same post). I have been on here and the other site and have always been firmly against the war and pre-emptive wars. I am a non-interventionalist. We don't need to police the world.

dwccrew wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote: That's what I mean by regulation.

And I find it hilarious that the same people bitching about the strain the illegals are on the economy have no problem with spending trillions on wars abroad.

I really hope you weren't referring to me in this post (since you were addressing me in the same post). I have been on here and the other site and have always been firmly against the war and pre-emptive wars. I am a non-interventionalist. We don't need to police the world.

No, just making a general statement.

I Wear Pants wrote:

dwccrew wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote: That's what I mean by regulation.

And I find it hilarious that the same people bitching about the strain the illegals are on the economy have no problem with spending trillions on wars abroad.

I really hope you weren't referring to me in this post (since you were addressing me in the same post). I have been on here and the other site and have always been firmly against the war and pre-emptive wars. I am a non-interventionalist. We don't need to police the world.

No, just making a general statement.

Gotcha

I Wear Pants wrote: And none of our dudes are helping people across the border...

you mean the border patrol or national guard? i havent heard any cases of them showing illegals when and where to cross the border or anything remotely related to the level of corruption on the mexico side.

I Wear Pants wrote: That's what I mean by regulation.

And I find it hilarious that the same people bitching about the strain the illegals are on the economy have no problem with spending trillions on wars abroad.

why? the wars abroad are fighting our enemies. i would say a good reason. what do ILLEGAL immigrants bring to the table....other than cheap labor?

Glory Days wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote: And none of our dudes are helping people across the border...

you mean the border patrol or national guard? i havent heard any cases of them showing illegals when and where to cross the border or anything remotely related to the level of corruption on the mexico side.

I Wear Pants wrote: That's what I mean by regulation.

And I find it hilarious that the same people bitching about the strain the illegals are on the economy have no problem with spending trillions on wars abroad.

why? the wars abroad are fighting our enemies. i would say a good reason. what do ILLEGAL immigrants bring to the table....other than cheap labor?

Afghanistan was a war where we were fighting our enemies. Iraq never was.

Here is the latest from Obama on immigration:
http://www.vindy.com/news/2010/apr/29/obama-immigration-reform-may-have-to-wai/?newswatch

President Barack Obama said Wednesday that there “may not be an appetite” in Congress to deal with immigration immediately after going through a tough legislative year.

Obama said there’s work to do on energy legislation, midterm elections are coming up, and he doesn’t want to do something “just for the sake of politics.” He said he hopes to get a working group together to solve a wide range of issues on immigration in a way that can garner the support of the American people.

Glory Days wrote: Here is the latest from Obama on immigration:
http://www.vindy.com/news/2010/apr/29/obama-immigration-reform-may-have-to-wai/?newswatch

President Barack Obama said Wednesday that there “may not be an appetite” in Congress to deal with immigration immediately after going through a tough legislative year.

Obama said there’s work to do on energy legislation, midterm elections are coming up, and he doesn’t want to do something “just for the sake of politics.” He said he hopes to get a working group together to solve a wide range of issues on immigration in a way that can garner the support of the American people.

Doesn't want to do anything just for the sake of politics? What the hell does that mean? Securing the border would be just for politics? What the hell does he think the entire health care fiasco was about? Unbelievable.

tk421 wrote: (Obama) Doesn't want to do anything just for the sake of politics? What the hell does that mean? Securing the border would be just for politics? What the hell does he think the entire health care fiasco was about? Unbelievable.

Obama picks his battles when it comes to interpreting "support of the American people.". Unfortunately he thinks federal interference and meddling in American personal health care choice is far more important than securing our nation's borders.

haha and a tough legislative year? isnt that what they get paid to do?

Does the term; illegal mean anything
The bottom line is simple the failure of our government to address this issue and to protect our boarders and the citizen over the years has lead to this situation. They don’t want to recognize their failure and take blame where blame begins.
Illegals are just that illegal and those that harbor and protect are also part of the problem. Take includes individual, groups, organization and Politician that refuses to support the laws and requirenmet set forth by law and their oath of office.

The oath of Congress office and the oath of President states in general; I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

I ask who is the enemy:

Congress and the failure of the government to secure our boarders and serve and direct the legal branch of government to enforce the law.

The Illegal’s that now pose a threat to many states, the economic well-being of those states and our Country and the ongoing threat to legal citizens

Or the legal American Citizen that wants what is their ..Right

I have been the victim of two criminal acts and both times the criminal have gotten off easy compared to the legal obligation I had, the financial loss and the trauma my family encountered. This is no different the innocent (Arizona Citizen and the American Public) pay the price of illegal (criminal action). Illegal don’t want to take the responsibility of the American citizen, bear the obligation of being a legal citizen or supporting our local, state and federal government with the burden they pose….all they want to do is TAKE and that within it’s self is disrespectful to America legal citizens and our legal System.

To end this problem many innocent people will have to endure the unjustified act of providing proper documentation because of the action of a failed and coward government on the issue of immigration. Again we the citizens will have to experience the discomforted of criminal action until the illegal’s understand their responsibilities and obligation to America and our boarders are secure and the oath of political office is upheld for the protection of LEGAL AMERICA CITZEN …..

Glory Days wrote: haha and a tough legislative year? isnt that what they get paid to do?

I know, right!?

ptown_trojans_1 wrote: Ugh, I can't this point of view. Whether you like it or not, the way the U.S. acts domestically does impact the way the U.S. power is perceived abroad. Why do you think countries could not stand the U.S. during the Bush years, cause we did stuff in 2002-2006 to tick them off. It is really hard to maintain economic, counterrorism, nonproliferation policies if we act stupid and tick off allies.

It's our domestic policy and a state law at that, not anybody else's. And I thought other countries "hated" Bush because of his foreign policy.

Do you really think that one state alone making a law on immigration will make other countrieS hate us?

And if that one state makes a law that makes other countrieS hate us, too damn bad. Mexico (for example) can tell it's people not to sneak across the border into Arizona, if it hurts their feelings that bad.
California will welcome them with open arms. :rolleyes:

Amnesty International releases report saying the Mexicans mistreat immigrants from Central America.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20100428/wl_csm/297614

I am not saying this law is just, but what remedies are better.Arizona's resources are being taxed by the illegal aliens and their children. It has been estimated that there are over 450,000 illegal aliens in Arizona.. What should they do??

Prescott wrote: I am not saying this law is just, but what remedies are better.Arizona's resources are being taxed by the illegal aliens and their children. It has been estimated that there are over 450,000 illegal aliens in Arizona.. What should they do??

If you're a Republican, you enforce the law.

If you're a Democrat, you turn those 450,000 into Democratic voters via amnesty, citizenship, and cries of "racial profiling" and "Nazi police state".

jhay78 wrote:

Prescott wrote: I am not saying this law is just, but what remedies are better.Arizona's resources are being taxed by the illegal aliens and their children. It has been estimated that there are over 450,000 illegal aliens in Arizona.. What should they do??

If you're a Republican, you enforce the law.

If you're a Democrat, you turn those 450,000 into Democratic voters via amnesty, citizenship, and cries of "racial profiling" and "Nazi police state".

There were no illegal aliens when Bush was in charge? Please, both sides have had a chance to fix it and have not.

I agree, Bush's "solution" was just as bad. I was speaking about Arizona there.

Jan Brewer's approval ratings jump since bill passed:

http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/PoliticalInsider/79673

jhay78 wrote:

Prescott wrote: I am not saying this law is just, but what remedies are better.Arizona's resources are being taxed by the illegal aliens and their children. It has been estimated that there are over 450,000 illegal aliens in Arizona.. What should they do??

If you're a Republican, you enforce the law.

If you're a Democrat, you turn those 450,000 into Democratic voters via amnesty, citizenship, and cries of "racial profiling" and "Nazi police state".

I think this is exactly why Obama is holding off on any movement towards illegal immigration. The Hispanic population generally votes Democrat (57% of the Hispanic American population are registered as such) http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/83.pdf

With the population leaning towards a Hispanic majority in the future with help of children born in the U.S. from illegals, why would the democrats stop this? It is putting a well known conservative state in a bad light with the Hispanic population in an area of the country that usually votes Republican.

IMO they will continue to sit back and keep the status quo, let the states make their own immigration laws because it will only help them out further at the polls.

If this law is the foundation for more states to follow suit then this may just be the beginning of a long line of Democrat's controlling the government.

Edit: Reading from the study posted above:

Among registered Latino voters, 41% say Democrats are doing a better job dealing with illegal immigration and just 14% say the GOP is doing better. The remainder say neither party (26%), both (7%) or don’t know (12%).

Further supporting why Democrats maintain their policy of do nothing towards alleviating immigration. Republicans have attempted to stop it and is being met by adverse results in the polls. I forgot to mention earlier that while 57% register Democrat, 23% are Republican so of the entire population there is a large swing vote. This issue being at the forefront of politics at the moment may hurt the mid-term election results that the GOP were hoping for.

mucalum49 wrote:

jhay78 wrote:

Prescott wrote: I am not saying this law is just, but what remedies are better.Arizona's resources are being taxed by the illegal aliens and their children. It has been estimated that there are over 450,000 illegal aliens in Arizona.. What should they do??

If you're a Republican, you enforce the law.

If you're a Democrat, you turn those 450,000 into Democratic voters via amnesty, citizenship, and cries of "racial profiling" and "Nazi police state".

I think this is exactly why Obama is holding off on any movement towards illegal immigration. The Hispanic population generally votes Democrat (57% of the Hispanic American population are registered as such) http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/83.pdf

With the population leaning towards a Hispanic majority in the future with help of children born in the U.S. from illegals, why would the democrats stop this? It is putting a well known conservative state in a bad light with the Hispanic population in an area of the country that usually votes Republican.

IMO they will continue to sit back and keep the status quo, let the states make their own immigration laws because it will only help them out further at the polls.

If this law is the foundation for more states to follow suit then this may just be the beginning of a long line of Democrat's controlling the government.

Edit: Reading from the study posted above:

Among registered Latino voters, 41% say Democrats are doing a better job dealing with illegal immigration and just 14% say the GOP is doing better. The remainder say neither party (26%), both (7%) or don’t know (12%).

Further supporting why Democrats maintain their policy of do nothing towards alleviating immigration. Republicans have attempted to stop it and is being met by adverse results in the polls. I forgot to mention earlier that while 57% register Democrat, 23% are Republican so of the entire population there is a large swing vote. This issue being at the forefront of politics at the moment may hurt the mid-term election results that the GOP were hoping for.

I don't buy that. Republicans in Arizona are attempting to stop it because the people of Arizona want it stopped- 70% of them. Add to that 60% nationally approve of the new law:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/nationally_60_favor_letting_local_police_stop_and_verify_immigration_status

When GW Bush tried amnesty, people were pissed and it fell dead in Congress. So no, I don't think the Republican's stance on this issue will hurt them.

I fully support this law and wish Ohio would do the same. They are criminals plain and simple