Illegal Immigration issue is key

[melissa22]

Illegal Immigration issue is key for a presidential candidate. Whoever stands out and goes against illegals will win in a landslide in 2012. Bank on it.

Some may not agree but if you remember when the democrats, Bush, etc. wanted to grant amnesty to all of the illegals, millions of americans wrote their congress, senators, and made phone calls, to tell them to NOT vote for that bill.

So what happened, the bill was thrown out and destroyed. That is clear proof that americans(left and right) are extremely against that. Probably mainly a lot of white americans but look at the unity when such an issue comes up. Pretty interesting.

Even my aunt who is a staunch liberal democrat was against that bill and said she would have voted for anyone that did something about illegals in 2008.

Mccain was a total setup by the MSM to be a complete failure and weak on this issue so Obama easilly crushed him.

I think that if Romney(not that I liked him but he said he'd deal with illegals) were running, Obama would have lost.

NWO's goal is to keep letting illegals come in.

just my 1 million gold bullions and 2 cents.

[Grandson of Liberty]

Unfortunately, I don't think there will be any illegals in 2012. :(


Congress thumbed their noses at us with the bailout. Just a harbinger of things to come.

[worl]

Our current gov. & the nwo will continue to import cheap labor as long as they stay in power. This is called capitalism. The illegals are being imported to take the place of you who refuse to work cheap. Because of nafta & cafta & other free trade agrements we also are made to compete with slave labor in china now. Our founding fathers warned us of this when they said that merchants have no allegance. I will sugguest everyone read "the camp of the saints" which tell's of immigration in europe & how it has distroyed the soverenty of those countries.

[melissa22]

Our current gov. & the nwo will continue to import cheap labor as long as they stay in power. This is called capitalism. The illegals are being imported to take the place of you who refuse to work cheap. Because of nafta & cafta & other free trade agrements we also are made to compete with slave labor in china now. Our founding fathers warned us of this when they said that merchants have no allegance. I will sugguest everyone read "the camp of the saints" which tell's of immigration in europe & how it has distroyed the soverenty of those countries.

I agree and I'll have to check out that book as well.

[melissa22]

Unfortunately, I don't think there will be any illegals in 2012. :(



Then this country will be completely gone as it's barely alive now.

[nbhadja]

Yes sadly now with the Dems controlling all of Washington, it is only a matter of time before they grant amnesty to the illegals. The only way I can see them failing to grant amnesty is if everyone gets so ticked off at it and protests like with what happened to the original bailout.

Ever been to east LA? Imagine the entire country like that :eek:

[nate895]

Yes sadly now with the Dems controlling all of Washington, it is only a matter of time before they grant amnesty to the illegals. The only way I can see them failing to grant amnesty is if everyone gets so ticked off at it and protests like with what happened to the original bailout.

Ever been to east LA? Imagine the entire country like that :eek:

With the GOP minority in the Senate (with the allocation of the defection of McCain and Graham) and defecting Democrat Senators, amnesty can still be stopped.

[Minuteman2008]

While amnesty can't be stopped if they want it bad enough, I can't imagine Obama will touch the issue during his first term. Rahm Emmanuel of all people has been one of the pols most opposed to the Dems going down that road, even though his voting record on the issue is very bad. The last thing he needs right off is a big firestorm of controversy while people are losing jobs left and right. The Kennedy-McCain bill called for huge increases in guest worker programs, something not exactly popular among a lot of Dem voters. The bill also would have brought in something in the range of 80 million more immigrants in 2 decades by way of chain migration , hence mostly people who are tax burdens. I actually think McCain would have been more likely to try to get an amnesty/immigration acceleration bill passed right away than Obama.

[rprprs]

...Ever been to east LA?...:eek:

No, but I've been to a Walmart in Philadelphia.:eek:

[libertea]

Why do alleged "Freedom Movement" members support this protectionist rhetoric? If this is the "Key" issue, we are worse off than I could have imagined.

[apropos]

Why do alleged "Freedom Movement" members support this protectionist rhetoric? If this is the "Key" issue, we are worse off than I could have imagined.

The Founders put a statement in the Constitution about "repelling invasion" for a reason, and if twelve to twenty million foreign nationals entering this country isn't an invasion, I don't know what is.

If our government does not respect national sovereignty, how can we seriously expect it to respect, say, the Bill of Rights?

[libertea]

The Founders put a statement in the Constitution about "repelling invasion" for a reason, and if twelve to twenty million foreign nationals entering this country isn't an invasion, I don't know what is.

If our government does not respect national sovereignty, how can we seriously expect it to respect, say, the Bill of Rights?

Oh, is that what they were talking about when they talk about invasion? Forgive my naivety. I thought they were talking about invasion of armed forces. Thanks for clearing that up.:rolleyes:

[melissa22]

Oh, is that what they were talking about when they talk about invasion? Forgive my naivety. I thought they were talking about invasion of armed forces. Thanks for clearing that up.:rolleyes:

Invasions come in many forms, just look at rome when the republic fell.

[melissa22]

yes sadly now with the dems controlling all of washington, it is only a matter of time before they grant amnesty to the illegals. The only way i can see them failing to grant amnesty is if everyone gets so ticked off at it and protests like with what happened to the original bailout.

Ever been to east la? Imagine the entire country like that :eek:

qft

[Shotdown1027]

I see no illegal immigrants organizing into Battallions and attacking public institutions, or even houses of citizens. To suggest it is an invasion is ridiculous.

[Lord Xar]

You are thinking too base, too obvious -- poster above --.

Like another poster pointed out -- an invasion can take many forms and most, non-violent. Case in point -- look at our government. We now have the most liberal senator as vice-president, 3rd most liberal as president. A majority in senate is almost complete of liberals.. Via the media and special interests, we are more like our old nemisis russia than ever before. There are many quotes on how socialism will come about by the very people who hate it. how? Violence? An overthrow?
Not really.

So, when you get tens of millions of immigrants pouring across the borders - who are NOT assimilating, NOT learning the language and demanding "dual cultures". Balkanization, then what?

Just because rioting isn't happening now, who is to say that the ballot box will not be the battle ground?

I say wise up. Either you live in a very 'american' area in which illegal immigration has not played a role thus far in your life, so you feign wisdom - yet its ignorance.

Our schools are being overrun, our hospitals are being overrun.. the taxpayers are dealing with this burden and then when amnesty comes - it will be a HUGE mistake because of chain migratiion and even MORE illegal immigration to follow.

I mean, all one has to do is see the movement of policies and the implementation - the wars, the open borders, the patriot act --everything. You have to understand, its all tied together. So, if the neo-cons AND the liberals want those borders open, why? What is the real goal.. to flood the host country with uneducated voters who need big government. ala. socialism -- and a reduction of the host countries original intent - its culture, its history.

[rprprs]

...NOT assimilating, NOT learning the language and demanding "dual cultures"....Our schools are being overrun, our hospitals are being overrun.. the taxpayers are dealing with this burden...

And you can add to that list of grievances the undercutting and depression of the prevailing wages for American workers. And please, no MSM BS about illegal immigrants taking jobs that American workers won't. I have first hand knowledge of this and have seen it occur in just about every industry and occupation you can think of. It ain't just farm work and fruit picking. When Americans won't accept jobs as construction workers or computer scientists, I might consider that argument.

[libertea]

And you can add to that list of grievances the undercutting and depression of the prevailing wages for American workers. And please, no MSM BS about illegal immigrants taking jobs that American workers won't. I have first hand knowledge of this and have seen it occur in just about every industry and occupation you can think of. It ain't just farm work and fruit picking. When Americans won't accept jobs as construction workers or computer scientists, I might consider that argument.

Please, no MSM BS protectionist rhetoric.

[libertea]

I say wise up. Either you live in a very 'american' area in which illegal immigration has not played a role thus far in your life, so you feign wisdom - yet its ignorance.



Texas. It's not the "Either" so it must be the "or" which you omitted. Please oh wise one, save me from my ignorance.

[Minuteman2008]

Please, no MSM BS protectionist rhetoric.

If believing in sovereignty and actual borders is now considered "protectionist" then I guess I'm a protectionist. I'm trying to imagine the disastrous results of actually listening to the "protectionists" and enforcing existing immigration laws. It's just not scaring me too badly.

[libertea]

If believing in sovereignty and actual borders is now considered "protectionist" then I guess I'm a protectionist. I'm trying to imagine the disastrous results of actually listening to the "protectionists" and enforcing existing immigration laws. It's just not scaring me too badly.

Whining about driving down wages is protectionist. The market should decide this. If workers are needed, they should be allowed to come. How does this have anything to do with sovereignty(sovereign: adj. Self-governing; independent: a sovereign state.)? Why do immigrants scare you so much?

You want to know how sovereignty is lost? Divide and conquer. That is quite a strong division you are perpetuating.

[Minuteman2008]

Whining about driving down wages is protectionist. The market should decide this. If workers are needed, they should be allowed to come. How does this have anything to do with sovereignty(sovereign: adj. Self-governing; independent: a sovereign state.)? Why do immigrants scare you so much?

You want to know how sovereignty is lost? Divide and conquer. That is quite a strong division you are perpetuating.

Maybe in some theoretical bubble open borders would be a benefit for the nation, but in a world that adds 80 million people per year, mostly in "developing" nations, I think I'll listen to the realists instead of the ideologues. Wow, I didn't know I was scared of immigrants (speaking of MSM BS). :rolleyes:

What I'm scared of are government policies specifically designed to alter the composition of the nation in order to water down any resistance to regional and world government. I'm also concerned about things like quality of life, the environment and what kind of future my children will have. Previous "amnesty" bills like McCain-Kennedy drastically accelerate immigration which already accounts for nearly all of our population growth. If passed, the population would grow much faster than at any time in the nation's history (80 to 100 million added in 2 decades according to the Heritage Foundation).

"Democracy cannot survive overpopulation. Human dignity cannot survive it. Convenience and decency cannot survive it. As you put more and more people into the world, the value of life not only declines, it disappears. It doesn't matter if someone dies. The more people there are, the less one individual matters."

* Isaac Asimov

[libertea]

Maybe in some theoretical bubble open borders would be a benefit for the nation, but in a world that adds 80 million people per year, mostly in "developing" nations, I think I'll listen to the realists instead of the ideologues. Wow, I didn't know I was scared of immigrants (speaking of MSM BS). :rolleyes:

What I'm scared of are government policies specifically designed to alter the composition of the nation in order to water down any resistance to regional and world government. I'm also concerned about things like quality of life, the environment and what kind of future my children will have. Previous "amnesty" bills like McCain-Kennedy drastically accelerate immigration which already accounts for nearly all of our population growth. If passed, the population would grow much faster than at any time in the nation's history (80 to 100 million added in 2 decades according to the Heritage Foundation).

"Democracy cannot survive overpopulation. Human dignity cannot survive it. Convenience and decency cannot survive it. As you put more and more people into the world, the value of life not only declines, it disappears. It doesn't matter if someone dies. The more people there are, the less one individual matters."

* Isaac Asimov

Forgive me if I don't succumb to the scarcity mentality. The "reality" is that through technological advances, we have gone in a little over 100 years from a country where 98% of the population worked in agriculture, to one where 2% of the US population can produce enough to feed 4 times the global population. We have gains in structural efficiency that allow stronger structures to be built using less than 1% of the raw material. Just think of the gains we would have if we did not have the government interfering in energy advances. I can not operate from the mindset that for any of us to prosper, it has to be at someone else's expense. I will keep my "ideology" over your(and Asimov's) sci-fi version of "reality" any day.

[HOLLYWOOD]

The ACLU legal representation was on C-SPAN's Washington Journal Friday morning. The ACLU stated that, "There's 8 million illegal immigrants in the US "

Now, I don't know about you, but there must be at least 8 million illegals in Nevada and California alone, let alone the entire country.

It has ALWAYS been the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT's policy to INCREASE the population as fast and as much as possible. The more Taxpayers, the more revenue for the Treasury/IRS/government.

Why do you think there was additionally, substantial increase and record, in the amount of naturalized citizens last year? Over 1 million!

This is a very quiet scam government is pulling over Americans... the government has also increased the amount of funding to migrate immigrants and refugees to the US.

Dilute the sovreignty and you can get more government favor laws and policies supported all by throwing garbage propaganda and morsels to the people.

All for government to interfere and maintain control!

[rprprs]

Whining about driving down wages is protectionist. The market should decide this. If workers are needed, they should be allowed to come. How does this have anything to do with sovereignty(sovereign: adj. Self-governing; independent: a sovereign state.)? Why do immigrants scare you so much?

You want to know how sovereignty is lost? Divide and conquer. That is quite a strong division you are perpetuating.

I am among the strongest proponents of the free market system. No better basis for an economy has been devised. I am, however, neither foolish nor naive enough to believe that it is immune to abuse, manipulation or perversion. The unscrupulous among the political and business communities will not hesitate to take full advantage.

Like Minuteman, I too am somewhat surprised to learn that I am scared of "immigants". I believe you have overstated and misrepresented the concerns of many here, and I know you have of mine. I refer you to the very first word in this thread.

"Divide and conquer" is, indeed, a very effective tool often used by government to control, manipulate and subvert its citizenry. You'll get no argument from me there. But, in the context of a sovereign nation, between citizens and the illegals among them, I'm afraid the relevant connection to this technique escapes me. Where exactly is the division and what segments divided? I would think that, by definition, the "division" between citizens and illegals is already sufficiently delineated.

[libertea]

I am among the strongest proponents of the free market system. No better basis for an economy has been devised. I am, however, neither foolish nor naive enough to believe that it is immune to abuse, manipulation or perversion. The unscrupulous among the political and business communities will not hesitate to take full advantage.

Like Minuteman, I too am somewhat surprised to learn that I am scared of "immigants". I believe you have overstated and misrepresented the concerns of many here, and I know you have of mine. I refer you to the very first word in this thread.

"Divide and conquer" is, indeed, a very effective tool often used by government to control, manipulate and subvert its citizenry. You'll get no argument from me there. But, in the context of a sovereign nation, between citizens and the illegals among them, I'm afraid the relevant connection to this technique escapes me. Where exactly is the division and what segments divided? I would think that, by definition, the "division" between citizens and illegals is already sufficiently delineated.

The first word is Illegal. My position is that immigration should not be illegal. Speeding is illegal, I don't see too many people getting worked up about that. Neither effect me one way or the other. Immigration effects you by your own volition.

If you and he/she is not scared, then why such strong opposition? I can't imagine being strongly opposed to immigration without feeling threatened by it. I apologize and I withdraw the "fear" comment.

It's not us against the Mexicans. It is the people vs. their unscrupulous manipulators and perversors(whatever the noun form is),as you so eloquently put it. I understand that you do not see this because our differing views on what should be legal and what should not. I have yet to receive an answer as to why immigration(remember, I think it should be legal) is a threat(sorry again for the fear implication but I don't know how else to say it) to sovereignty? Or is speeding also a threat to sovereignty because it is illegal?

[Deborah K]

Why do immigrants scare you so much?



Immigrants don't "scare" the Minutemen. ILLEGAL immigrants have no business here. They are contributing to the economic disaster that is befalling us. There is no doubt about that. THAT is what scares the hell out of THIS Minuteman(woman).

If you are so upset that we have immigration laws that need to be upheld, then you must really be pissed about Mexico's immigration laws because they are MUCH more stringent than ours. :rolleyes:

[libertea]

If you are so upset that we have immigration laws that need to be upheld, then you must really be pissed about Mexico's immigration laws because they are MUCH more stringent than ours. :rolleyes:

I was near the Mexico, Guatemala border this summer. Not a pretty sight. I am not upset, I just think they, as with many laws, should not exist(here, Mexico or elsewhere).

[qh4dotcom]

Illegal Immigration issue is key for a presidential candidate. Whoever stands out and goes against illegals will win in a landslide in 2012. Bank on it.

Really? Tell that to the 120+ million folks who voted for Obama amnesty and McCain amnesty. Both got 200+ times more votes than all the anti-amnesty candidates combined.

[Brian4Liberty]

The worst thing about immigration is all the trolls it brings to the RPF. :rolleyes:

[SooperDave]

I really believe we'll see amnesty rammed down our throats asap. More documented workers paying taxes is the only way this ponzi/pyramid system of entitlements will continue for another generation. Thats why I believe europe has been so open with their immigration policies the last decade. Plus the more documented hispanics= more votes for the dems. They will be unstoppable in 2012.

[rprprs]

I really believe we'll see amnesty rammed down our throats asap. More documented workers paying taxes is the only way this ponzi/pyramid system of entitlements will continue for another generation. Thats why I believe europe has been so open with their immigration policies the last decade. Plus the more documented hispanics= more votes for the dems. They will be unstoppable in 2012.

I agree, but with one caveat. If and when amnesty is granted, it will most likely confer a status of "permanent residency" which does not include the right to vote. Only citizens have that right, and (at least under current law) most of these new permanent residents could not be expected to obtain citizenship in time to vote in 2012. Thus, it is unlikely there will be any significant direct impact on the 2012 elections. In the longer run, however, I believe your assessment is correct. I also believe the dems will be unstoppable in 2012, but for a variety of other reasons.

[worl]

The first word is Illegal. My position is that immigration should not be illegal. Speeding is illegal, I don't see too many people getting worked up about that. Neither effect me one way or the other. Immigration effects you by your own volition.

If you and he/she is not scared, then why such strong opposition? I can't imagine being strongly opposed to immigration without feeling threatened by it. I apologize and I withdraw the "fear" comment.

It's not us against the Mexicans. It is the people vs. their unscrupulous manipulators and perversors(whatever the noun form is),as you so eloquently put it. I understand that you do not see this because our differing views on what should be legal and what should not. I have yet to receive an answer as to why immigration(remember, I think it should be legal) is a threat(sorry again for the fear implication but I don't know how else to say it) to sovereignty? Or is speeding also a threat to sovereignty because it is illegal?
One main purpose of the Ron Paul movement is to uphold the constitution. Legal Immigration is done through a process spelled out in the constitution & does'nt include illegal mexicans marching in the streets flying the mexican flag. I happen to believe our constution is the answer to a lot of our problems & changing it "as you might suggest" causes more problems. Where would you stop as far as the change in immigration, maybe freedom of speech a little, right to keep & bear arms, states rights, where does it stop.

[libertea]

One main purpose of the Ron Paul movement is to uphold the constitution. Legal Immigration is done through a process spelled out in the constitution & does'nt include illegal mexicans marching in the streets flying the mexican flag. I happen to believe our constution is the answer to a lot of our problems & changing it "as you might suggest" causes more problems. Where would you stop as far as the change in immigration, maybe freedom of speech a little, right to keep & bear arms, states rights, where does it stop.

I agree with Ron Paul, that this is an "Economic issue". Our views vary ever so slightly. My take is that the market will limit immigration and we don't have to.

I have been through the "process" with my wife. I don't think anything that we had to go through was in the constitution. What is your constitutional solution? Where is my solution unconstitutional? When have I suggested changing the constitution?

[melissa22]

Really? Tell that to the 120+ million folks who voted for Obama amnesty and McCain amnesty. Both got 200+ times more votes than all the anti-amnesty candidates combined.


You failed to listen. I ALREADY explained that the MSM proped up the two candidates that would keep the illegal immigration flow coming in.

That is why I made that point that if a candidate was ever very anti-illegal immigration and like Ron Paul on other issues, but actually in the running against the top tier, that person would crush an obama or mccain. Givin that they had some notoreity and ability to get past the MSM partially.

This is why I strongly feel that a presidential grassroots campaign MUST start NOW or ASAP with immigration sites and groups all giving their nods to such a candidate. It's the only way that in 4 years we might have a chance.

[melissa22]

The worst thing about immigration is all the trolls it brings to the RPF. :rolleyes:

Yourself included?

[melissa22]

I agree, but with one caveat. If and when amnesty is granted, it will most likely confer a status of "permanent residency" which does not include the right to vote. Only citizens have that right, and (at least under current law) most of these new permanent residents could not be expected to obtain citizenship in time to vote in 2012. Thus, it is unlikely there will be any significant direct impact on the 2012 elections. In the longer run, however, I believe your assessment is correct. I also believe the dems will be unstoppable in 2012, but for a variety of other reasons.

So the democrat party ultimately IS the anti euro-american party.

[melissa22]

I agree with Ron Paul, that this is an "Economic issue". Our views vary ever so slightly. My take is that the market will limit immigration and we don't have to.

I have been through the "process" with my wife. I don't think anything that we had to go through was in the constitution. What is your constitutional solution? Where is my solution unconstitutional? When have I suggested changing the constitution?

zeeeeeeeee, Viva la raza.