Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 46

Thread: Site Issue Evaluation: Ron Paul's border / immigration position

  1. #1
    Staff - Admin
    Houston, TX
    Bryan's Avatar


    Blog Entries
    3
    Posts
    8,282
    Join Date
    May 2007

    Default Site Issue Evaluation: Ron Paul's border / immigration position

    Issue Summary: Site members are at odds at to what exactly Ron Paul's position is with regard to the border and immigration. This thread will serve as the highest order analysis of the issue for the site.


    Issue Evaluation: All site members are welcome to post information and provide analysis of the issue. Please included sources as necessary.


    Final Clarifications: If any of Dr. Paul's statements is considered to imply a major point which is logically refuted by another member we can attempt to seek some final clarification. In such cases, develop questions that could be posed.


    Notes: Previously developed points in other threads can be posted here. Assistance in aggregating points for each section is appreciated. Non-constructive posts may be deleted.


    Thank you.
    This site has a specific purpose defined in our Mission Statement.

    Members must read and follow our Community Guidelines.

    I strive to respond to all queries; please excuse late and out-of-sequence responses.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Last edited by Brian4Liberty; 04-10-2016 at 12:05 AM.
    Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  4. #3

    Default

    On Illegal Immigration and Border Security

    By Ron Paul

    Illegal immigration is on the forefront of many Americans’ minds lately and with good reason. The Center for Immigration Studies has recently reported that our immigrant population is now 37 million, up from 27 million in 1997. 1 in 3 of these immigrants are here illegally. We have a problem that has exploded in the last 10 years with no appreciable change in border security since September 11 when we were supposed to take a hard look at the problem.

    We have security issues at home and our resources are running thin. Our education system is stretched, and immigration accounts for virtually all the national increase in public school enrollment in the last 2 decades. There is a worker present in 78% of immigrant households using at least one major welfare program, according to the same study. It’s no surprise then that oftentimes these immigrants can afford to work for lower wages. They are subsidized by our government to do so.

    Right now we are subsidizing a lot of illegal immigration with our robust social programs and it is an outrage that instead of coming to the United States as a land of opportunity, many come for the security guaranteed by government forced transfer payments through our welfare system. I have opposed giving federal assistance to illegal immigrants and have introduced legislation that ends this practice. In the last major House-passed immigration bill, I attempted to introduce an amendment that would make illegal immigrants ineligible for any federal assistance. Unfortunately, that amendment was ruled "not relevant" to immigration reform. I believe it is very relevant to taxpayers, however, who are being taken advantage of through the welfare system. Illegal immigrants should never be eligible for public schooling, social security checks, welfare checks, free healthcare, food stamps, or any other form of government assistance.

    The anchor baby phenomenon has also been very problematic. Simply being born on US soil to illegal immigrant parents should not trigger automatic citizenship. This encourages many dangerous behaviors and there are many unintended consequences as a result of this blanket policy. I am against amnesty and I have introduced an amendment to the Constitution (H.J. Res 46) which will end this form of amnesty.

    I have also supported the strengthening our border and increasing the number of border patrol agents. It is an outrage that our best-trained border guards are sent to Iraq instead of guarding our borders. For national security, we need to give more attention to our own border which is being illegally breached every day, and yet the government shirks one of its few constitutionally mandated duties, namely to defend this country. Citizens lose twice with our current insecure border situation — we don’t have the protection we should have, and then taxpayers have to deal with the fallout in the form of overstretched public resources and loss of jobs.

    The anger is understandable when it comes to illegal immigration and the problems with our borders. I will continue to fight in Congress for more effective ways to address these issues in keeping with the Constitutional mandate to protect America.
    ...
    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2007/12/...rder-security/
    Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  5. #4

  6. #5

    Default


    FIRST AND FOREMOST:
    END THE FED


    YAY:

    ONLY LEGAL CITIZENS VOTE
    GOVERNMENT SERVICE ENGLISH ONLY
    SPONSORED PRESENCE
    UNMOLESTED INTERIOR TRAVEL
    DEPORT CRIMINAL NON CITIZENS
    DEPORT ENTITLEMENTS SEEKING NON CITIZENS
    PRIVATE "NO TRESPASS" ON BORDER

    NAY:

    ROUND UP THE ILLEGALS
    BORDER FENCE
    MACHINE GUNS ON THE BORDER
    DEPORT EMPLOYED
    DEPORT WITH FAMILY SPONSOR
    AMNESTY
    VISAS FOR STATE TERRORISM SPONSORS
    IMMIGRATION POLICY QUOTAS
    HEALTHCARE PROVIDER MANDATES
    EDUCATION MANDATES
    HOUSING MANDATES
    NON-CITIZEN SOCIAL SECURITY
    DEPORTATION OF ASSIMILATED NON PUBLIC CHARGE
    SUMMARY SEARCH FOR ID
    PENALTIES FOR PRIVATE CHARITY
    PENALTIES FOR PRIVATE BUSINESS
    ALTERNATE PATH TO CITIZENSHIP
    BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP
    WELFARE FOR NON CITIZENS



    Do increase presence of state agents at the border,
    commensurate with current level of migration.
    On a case by case basis:
    Issue green cards with an asterisk noting the above,
    for immigrants with a citizen sponsor;
    private employer, private charity, or family
    .

    - Ron Paul Immigration Platform -

    developing citations below... work in progress:


    http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Ron_...mmigration.htm
    http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/arch...ok-to-liberty/


    “As in our country’s first 150 years,
    there shouldn’t be any immigration policy at all.
    We should welcome everyone who wants to come here and work.


    -Ron Paul 1988, running for POTUS under LP banner
    In the ideal libertarian world, borders would be blurred and open.

    Under today’s circumstances, with a government-precipitated recession (a depression for those who earn under $30,000 a year) and promises of welfare, obviously some rules are required.


    Liberty Defined, Ron Paul

    Be it enacted that Executive Order 13166, 'Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency' (August 16, 2000), is null and void and shall have no force or effect.
    The bill would specify that hospitals aren't required to provide care to undocumented aliens
    amnesty, which I’m positively opposed to
    []

    we force our states and our local communities to pay for the health care and pay for the education.

    Saint Anselm College Jun 3, 2007

    I do believe that we have to stick to our guns on obeying the law, and anybody who comes in here illegally shouldn’t be rewarded.

    We encourage people not to work here, but the welfare we offer the people who come--they get free medical care. They get free education. They bankrupt our hospitals. Our hospitals are closing. And it shouldn’t be rewarded. That means you don’t give them citizenship.

    You can’t solve this problem until

    you get rid of the welfare state, because in a healthy economy, immigrants wouldn’t be a threat to us.

    Morgan State University Sep 27, 2007

    My approach to immigration is somewhat different than the others.

    Mine is
    you deal with it economically

    We’re in worse shape now because we subsidize immigration. We give food stamps, Social Security, free medical care, free education and amnesty. So you subsidize it, and you have a mess.

    Meet the Press Dec 23, 2007
    This bill will deny student and "diversity" visas to anyone coming from a country currently on the State Department's list of terrorism-sponsoring countries.
    I have suggested in my book Liberty Defined that some status short of citizenship might be conferred on a case-by-case basis. Perhaps a “green card” with a notation indicating that the person is

    not eligible for welfare and
    not permitted to vote in the United States.

    []
    One very important “right” currently granted by US citizenship is the “right” to all the free stuff from the government. A more libertarian society would likely have a more restrictive immigration policy because entry into the US would not be accompanied by guarantees of free things and most property would be owned privately.
    []
    Similarly, the issue of birthright citizenship would be much less difficult if acquiring American citizenship by the fact of being born on US soil did not grant the child the ability to take advantage of the welfare state. Remove the welfare magnet and you will greatly reduce the incentive to give birth here in order to gain citizenship for the baby.
    []
    It is our weak economy, caused to a great degree by the Federal Reserve system and the business cycles it constantly creates, that makes the immigration situation worse for us.
    It was a good principle to say that when immigrants come in, they`re on their own. They better have a sponsor. You either have a job or you have a family; you`re not going on the dole.
    Has anyone thought for a moment

    about how difficult,
    expensive,
    disruptive,
    and dangerous to our civil liberties it would be

    to turn over every stone in this country to search for someone who might not be here legally? How many billions of dollars would it cost? The government would likely introduce a national identification card in effort to determine who should be here and who should not. The cards would no doubt be equipped with biometric data to transmit to the government information about law-abiding American citizens that they have no right knowing.
    I think when you know where they are, and you know they`re illegal, they should be sent back.
    Especially if they`re caught in a crime.

    I think you have to be realistic. I mean, having an army to go around the country to round them up and put them in trucks and haul them out, that`s not feasible.

    But certainly if they`re signing up for a benefit, they should be sent back home, instead of given the benefit.
    []

    You`d like to restore the presumption against being a public charge?

    "Right. Or if they`re caught in a criminal act—rather than sending them through the court system and spending all that money and then putting them up in prison, we can get them shipped out pretty fast. Unless they are a very violent criminal. "

    if there is indeed a shortage, and this is a legal process, this shouldn`t be threatening to us. How would you determine that there was a shortage?
    Well, I don`t think it would be easy but if there`s a need and immigrants can get a job, that means there`s a shortage.
    http://www.vdare.com/articles/ron-pa...al-sovereignty

    “The people that want big fences and guns, sure, we could secure the border,” the congressman noted. “A barbed wire fence with machine guns, that would do the trick. I don’t believe that is what America is all about.”

    you deal with it economically
    economically
    economically
    economically
    economically
    economically




    See Post 12 for the chapter on IMMIGRATION from LIBERTY DEFINED.
    Last edited by presence; 04-11-2016 at 09:43 AM.

  7. #6

    Default

    I have seen this debated forever. The fact of the matter is he took both sides on immigration. He represented a district in Texas where being against amnesty was just as necessary to winning as being pro-life.

    In 2007, he was doing interviews with VDare talking about immigrants taking jobs. http://www.vdare.com/articles/ron-pa...al-sovereignty And he was comfortable running this ad, both of which would lead you to think he is an immigration hardliner.


    He got an F from NumbersUSA for his immigration positions the second time he ran for President. He previously had a lifetime 'B-' grade with them. Here are some quotes from 2011 in Liberty Defined.

    ". . . immigrants that can't be sent back due to the magnitude of the problem should not be given citizenship -- no amnesty should be granted. Maybe a 'green card' with an asterisk should be issued.... It could be argued that [this system[ may well allow some immigrants who come here illegally a beneficial status without automatic citizenship or tax-supported benefits -- a much better option than deportation."
    . . sending twelve to fifteen million illegals home... isn't going to happen. Neither the determination or the ability to accomplish it exists. Besides, if each case is looked at separately, we would find ourselves splitting up families and deporting some who have lived here for decades, if not their entire life, and who never lived for any length of time in Mexico. This would hardly be a Good Samaritan approach to the problem. It would be incompatible with human rights."

    " . . (if government-mandated free services and the government-created unemployed crisis were) fixed, (then the resulting) free and prosperous economy (would look for labor and) immigrant workers would be needed and welcomed. This need could be managed by a generous guest worker program. . . . (We should) restore our economy to a healthy free market with sound money and eliminate deficit-financed government. A vibrant economy will minimize the problems and produce a high demand for both domestic and immigrant labor . . . with free markets and private property, a need for immigrant labor becomes obvious. Make it easy and legal with a generous visitor worker program."

    Requiring businesses to verify the legality of workers is a form of "compulsory servitude," he writes.

    "many claim that illegal immigrants take American jobs. This is true, but most of the jobs they 'take' are the ones unemployed Americans refuse at the wage offered. Rarely is this even minimum wage; it's usually higher. . . . (most immigrants) have a work ethic superior to many of our own citizens."


    His position seems like a very practical one. No citizenship because it encourages law breaking and entitles a person to government benefits. Make it easier to come here legally to work with increased work visas. Deportation is impractical so give people amnesty with a green card but no citizenship. Sounds like Ted Cruz and Rand Paul.

  8. #7

  9. #8

    Default

    I think Brian has covered it.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  10. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by presence View Post
    YES PRESENCE BUT NO ALTERNATE PATH TO CITIZENSHIP
    Some of those quotes sound likely from Ron, but that quote right there is not familiar. Do you have a reference link? Is this related to your username?
    Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  11. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    Some of those quotes sound likely from Ron, but that quote right there is not familiar. Do you have a reference link? Is this related to your username?

    YES PRESENCE


    as in non citizens can be present in the country; "green card with asterisk" "establish visitor work program"
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=OfJFcSF80dE
    http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/border-security/
    also, no active search of the interior for "illegals"; it would be too costly financially and to liberty to




    turn over every stone in this country to search for someone who might not be here legally
    http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/arch...ok-to-liberty/

    They can be here; present: Sponsored by a private employer, a private charitable party, or family but they cannot be a public charge.

    edited previous post to

    YES SPONSORED PRESENCE
    as per http://www.vdare.com/articles/ron-pa...al-sovereignty

    Meaning you get to stay ( green card with asterisk) if you have a employment, charitable, or family sponsor.




    BUT NO ALTERNATE PATH TO CITIZENSHIP
    Amnesty is the largest of these rewards and gives illegal aliens a path to citizenship or makes them instantly legal. Representative Ron Paul does not approve of amnesty for illegal aliens and has worked against it.

    http://immigrationstance.diggersreal...al_aliens.html


    The implication is that privately sponsored migrant presence in the intererior deserves nothing more than a green card with an asterisk making the migrant aware of their non-entitlement status, should an official incidentally detain the migrant for some other reason.







    Last edited by presence; 04-11-2016 at 12:38 PM.

    'We endorse the idea of voluntarism; self-responsibility: Family, friends, and churches to solve problems, rather than saying that some monolithic government is going to make you take care of yourself and be a better person. It's a preposterous notion: It never worked, it never will. The government can't make you a better person; it can't make you follow good habits.' - Ron Paul 1988

    Awareness is the Root of Liberation Revolution is Action upon Revelation

    'Resistance and Disobedience in Economic Activity is the Most Moral Human Action Possible' - SEK3

    Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo.

    ...the familiar ritual of institutional self-absolution...
    ...for protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment...


  12. #11

    Default

    According to his book, Liberty Defined, we can say the following about his immigration positions:

    1) For practical purposes he is against deporting most illegal immigrants. It isn't clear under what circumstances he would favor deportation (p. 153):
    . . . sending twelve to fifteen million illegals home... isn't going to happen. Neither the determination or the ability to accomplish it exists. Besides, if each case is looked at separately, we would find ourselves splitting up families and deporting some who have lived here for decades, if not their entire life, and who never lived for any length of time in Mexico. This would hardly be a Good Samaritan approach to the problem. It would be incompatible with human rights.
    2) He is against amnesty, when that is defined as giving illegal immigrants citizenship, but still for giving them legal status to be allowed to remain here (p. 156):
    . . . immigrants that can't be sent back due to the magnitude of the problem should not be given citizenship -- no amnesty should be granted. Maybe a 'green card' with an asterisk should be issued.... It could be argued that [this system[ may well allow some immigrants who come here illegally a beneficial status without automatic citizenship or tax-supported benefits -- a much better option than deportation.
    3) He is for ending birthright citizenship (p. 155):
    (The United States should) not grant automatic citizenship to children of illegal immigrants born in the United States, deliberately or accidentally.
    4) He is against involving third parties (including, but not limited to employers) in enforcing immigration laws (p. 155):
    (We shouldn't) punish third parties for not being keen to act as law enforcement agents in regard to illegal immigration. Blaming American employers and fining them for hiring an individual, directly or indirectly, possibly with a counterfeit identification, strikes me as a compulsory servitude not permitted under the Constitution. Determining who is legal or not is a police and court function, not a responsibility of private business."
    This is a major point. For all practical purposes, this removes all the teeth from our immigration laws. One might theoretically be in favor of deporting some, most, or all illegal immigrants. But without keeping track of who people hire and who people rent apartments to, there's hardly any way to find illegal immigrants, except for those who commit other crimes.

    5) He is for increasing legal immigration and making it easier to immigrate here legally (pp. 153-54):
    (if government-mandated free services and the government-created unemployed crisis were) fixed, (then the resulting) free and prosperous economy (would look for labor and) immigrant workers would be needed and welcomed. This need could be managed by a generous guest worker program. . . . (We should) restore our economy to a healthy free market with sound money and eliminate deficit-financed government. A vibrant economy will minimize the problems and produce a high demand for both domestic and immigrant labor . . . with free markets and private property, a need for immigrant labor becomes obvious. Make it easy and legal with a generous visitor worker program.
    6) He considers the influx of foreign labor a good thing economically (p. 154):
    many claim that illegal immigrants take American jobs. This is true, but most of the jobs they 'take' are the ones unemployed Americans refuse at the wage offered. Rarely is this even minimum wage; it's usually higher. . . . (most immigrants) have a work ethic superior to many of our own citizens.
    7) He is for allowing US citizens both to exit and re-enter through our borders with Mexico and Canada without passports (pp. 157-58):
    Another concern I have with the immigration issue is that the strong border protection proponents are as interested in regulating our right to freely exit the country as they are in preventing illegal entry. No longer can we travel even to Canada or Mexico without a U.S. passport. Our government keeps tabs on our every move, which involves a lot more than looking for drug dealers, illegal immigrants, or stopping a potential terrorist.... A tight border policy to keep certain people out is one thing, but tight border control to limit our ability to leave when we please is something else.
    This is another major point. Obviously, if US citizens can re-enter without passports, then anybody can enter the US without a passport. This, combined with the point about not involving third parties in enforcement, makes all visas practically irrelevant.

    8) He is for allowing states to enforce their own immigration laws, but seems to be against any laws that would require US citizens to prove their citizenship:
    permit states to enforce [immigration] laws (but) Arizona-type immigration legislation can turn out to be harmful. Being able to stop any American citizen under the vague charge of 'suspicion' is dangerous.
    Again, this must apply to all people and not just US citizens. If nobody ever has to be able to produce any papers for anyone, showing that they're here legally, there's no way to enforce any immigration laws except against illegal immigrants who commit other crimes.

    As is well known here, Ron Paul is also against a border wall. I'm not sure if this comes up in Liberty Defined.


    In general, it's safe to characterize Ron Paul's approach to immigration as an across the board laissez fair approach. In all respects, both those that are favorable to more immigration, legal and illegal, and those that are unfavorable to it, Ron Paul's approach is the one that gets government out of the way, rather than making it more involved.

    Some will say that people who take such an approach don't believe in any borders at all, or the existence of nations, or that they're globalists and not nationalists, advancing the cause of the New World Order. I agree with Ron Paul on all of these points and have had people here charge me with those things because I do. But it seems to me that, as long as the approach is one that shuns government involvement, none of those charges are valid. Ron Paul is a self-described globalist, but not of the one-world-government variety. He is a free market globalist, favoring unimpeded and unlimited passage of people and goods across all borders, cultivating a global economy with global commodity-based private currencies that will emerge in a free market.
    Last edited by erowe1; 04-10-2016 at 10:08 PM.

  13. #12

    Default

    http://www.libertarianismo.org/livro...ulldefined.pdf

    LIBERTY DEFINED
    RON PAUL

    IMMIGRATION

    There seem to be two extreme positions on immigration: completely closed borders and totally open borders. The Constitution, common sense, and the philosophy of freedom offer a principled alternative to these two rash options.

    It’s best to try to understand why immigration is such a hot-button issue for most Americans. There are many reasons why the politics of immigration are so emotionally charged. The most telling reason is related to economic concerns and violence; immigrants, it is said, take jobs from American working people; federal mandates require states to provide free medical and educational benefits to illegals; a weak economy exaggerates the economic consequences of legal and illegal immigration.

    The political motivations are important contributing factors as well and are the concerns of many Americans. It is assumed that all immigrants, including illegals, will benefit liberals and Democrats at the voting booth. Evidence exists that some illegals do vote and they don’t vote for Republicans. Illegals are counted in the census, creating a situation where they can statistically add up to several congressional districts. Texas, for instance, gained four new seats after the 2010 census was completed and this was, to a large degree, a reflection of our immigration policies.

    Due to the immensity of this emotionally charged problem, a simple answer under current conditions will not be easily found. In the ideal libertarian world, borders would be blurred and open. It would be something similar to what the Constitution did with the borders between the various states. Civilization has not yet come even close to being capable of such a policy, though it engages some in a theoretical discussion.

    The libertarians who argue for completely open borders for the free flow of goods and people fail to realize that a truly libertarian society would not necessarily be that open. The land and property would be privately owned and controlled by the owners, who would have the right to prevent newcomers from entering without their permission. There would be no government havens or welfare benefits and new immigrants would come only after a sponsor’s permission.

    Under today’s circumstances, with a government-precipitated recession (a depression for those who earn under $30,000 a year) and promises of welfare, obviously some rules are required.

    It’s important to note that the greatest resentment comes from government-mandated free services and a government-created unemployment crisis. Fix these two problems and finding a scapegoat for our economic crisis wouldn’t be necessary.

    A free and prosperous economy always looks for labor; immigrant workers would be needed and welcomed. This need could be managed by a generous guest worker program, not by illegal immigrants receiving benefits for the family and securing an easy route to permanent citizenship and thus becoming pawns of partisan political interests.

    Since Washington will not soon come to its senses and allow for the needed economic corrections to restore a healthy free market economy, we are forced to deal with current conditions, which are rapidly deteriorating.

    Even today with all our government excesses we have millions of people and businesses protected by private security. Dow Chemical has fences and private security guards, as do most of the chemical plants located a few miles from where I live. There are no trespassers and if a problem occurs, the police or sheriff is called.

    But if a rancher on our border wants to stop trespassers on his land, he is forbidden to do so. The Feds don’t even allow the state law enforcement officers to interfere! This, they argue, could lead to violence if an appropriate use of force is not used. Shooting suspected illegal aliens on sight would be a horrendous error and serious people are concerned about it happening.

    At the federal government–maintained borders, where a war is going on, the violence is already out of control and growing. The conditions we have created with illegal trafficking in immigrants is serious, but the recent escalation has involved the drug cartels and border guards, the military, and the police, a consequence of the ridiculous notion that drug prohibition is a sensible social policy.

    Everyone by now should know that our current war on drugs makes no more sense than alcohol prohibition did in the 1920s. One only needs to study the drug trade and corruption ongoing in Afghanistan to see the danger of the war on drugs. The huge profits that can be made are a significant incentive for corruption across the board.

    Even with a healthy economy and stricter border controls, the issue of what to do with twelve-million-plus illegals already here would persist. One side says use the U.S. Army, round them up, and ship them home. The other side says give them amnesty, make them full-fledged citizens, and reward the lawbreakers, thus insulting and unfairly penalizing those who have patiently waited and obeyed our immigration laws.

    The first choice— sending twelve to fifteen million illegals home— isn’t going to happen and should not happen. Neither the determination or the ability to accomplish it exists. Besides, if each case is looked at separately, we would find ourselves splitting up families and deporting some who have lived here for decades, if not their entire life, and who never lived for any length of time in Mexico. This would hardly be a Good Samaritan approach to the problem. It would be incompatible with human rights.

    The toughest part of showing any compassion or tolerance to the illegal immigrants who are very much Americanized is the tremendous encouragement it gives for more immigrants to come illegally and avoid the wait and bureaucracy. Considering what they face at home, they see the risk of sneaking in as being minor compared to the risk of dying in poverty in Central America.

    Some of the resentment by Americans is that many immigrants are “Americanized” rather quickly.

    Most immigrants do not come for handouts; rather, they come for survival reasons and have a work ethic superior to many of our own citizens who have grown dependent on welfare and unemployment benefits. This anger may reflect embarrassment as much as anything.

    Many claim that illegal immigrants take American jobs. This is true, but most of the jobs they “take” are the ones unemployed Americans refuse at the wage offered. Rarely is this even minimum wage; it’s usually higher. It’s hard to hide the fact that resentment toward a Hispanic immigrant is more common than that toward a European illegal immigrant.

    Immigration laws, out of practicality, can never be equally enforced on those who have been assimilated for five to ten or even twenty years as compared to those caught currently coming through our border states in the Southwest. On the immigration issue I have found no one with the wisdom of Solomon.



    My humble suggestions on what to do follow.

    1) Restore our economy to a healthy free market with sound money and eliminate deficit-financed government. A vibrant economy will minimize the problems and produce a high demand for both domestic and immigrant labor.

    2) Abolish the welfare state. The incentive to always take a job— at whatever wage available— must prevail. A healthy economy, absent Federal Reserve–induced recession or depression and inflation, will keep real wages high.

    3) With free markets and private property, a need for immigrant labor becomes obvious. Make it legal and easy with a generous visitor work program.

    4) Enforce the laws now on the books with more border guards; permit states to enforce the law; allow landowners to provide private property security assistance, just as we do every day throughout the United States, and to work with Federal Border Control authorities. Private landowners have a right to post No Trespassing signs on their property to achieve this.

    5) Do not grant automatic citizenship to children of illegal immigrants born in the United States, deliberately or accidentally.

    6) Stop all federal mandates on the states to provide free education and medical care for illegal immigrants. The absurdity that South Texas schools are overburdened with Mexican children going back and forth over the border each day to our public school systems is resented by cash-strapped school districts.

    7) Bilingualism should always be voluntary and not compelled by law.

    8) Don’t punish third parties for not being keen to act as law enforcement agents in regard to illegal immigration. Blaming American employers and fining them for hiring an individual, directly or indirectly, possibly with a counterfeit identification, strikes me as a compulsory servitude not permitted under the Constitution. Determining who is legal or not is a police and court function, not a responsibility of private business.

    9) Same goes for the Catholic Church. When those who suffer the chaos of immigration and drug wars on the border are helped by the Church, the Church should never be seen as an accomplice to a crime. Let the Church show the compassion that’s required to pick up the pieces of a government-created mess.

    10) End the drug war. The deteriorating economic conditions and the mess with immigration invite the violence of the drug lords and corrupt officials on both sides. It’s time to break up the coalition of the religious drug warriors and the drug dealers who fight any effort to decriminalize drugs. It’s time to treat all drugs the way we treat alcohol and cigarettes, substances that kill millions more than hard drugs do. The drug war is deadly and allows drug lords to make a lot more money than legalized drugs ever would. The drug war and the illegal immigration across our southern borders cannot be separated.

    11) Immigrants who can’t be sent back due to the magnitude of the problem should not be given citizenship— no amnesty should be granted. Maybe a “green card” with an asterisk could be issued. This in-between status, keeping illegal immigrants in limbo, will be condemned by the welfare left as being too harsh and condemned by the confused right as being too generous. It will be said that it will create a class of second- class citizens. Yet it could be argued that it may well allow some immigrants who come here illegally a beneficial status without automatic citizenship or tax-supported benefits— a much better option than deportation.

    12) Those immigrants, legal or illegal, who incite violence or commit crimes of violence should be prosecuted under the law and lose their right to stay in this country.

    13) The police should not be prohibited from determining an individual’s citizenship if the person is caught participating in a crime. This is far different from stopping anyone any time and demanding the individual present documentation of a legal status. That invokes the principle of “reasonable cause,” not reasonable suspicion.

    This solution is far from perfect, but solutions to government-induced problems are never easy. Since our economic problems have been the major contributing factor, all other solutions come up short. Maximum freedom for everyone is the best way to go in solving any of our problems.

    Another concern I have with the immigration issue is that the strong border protection proponents are as interested in regulating our right to freely exit the country as they are in preventing illegal entry. No longer can we travel even to Canada or Mexico without a U.S. passport. Our government keeps tabs on our every move, which involves a lot more than looking for drug dealers, illegal immigrants, or stopping a potential terrorist.

    Financial controls have been growing since the 1970s, and as the financial crisis worsens, not only will our coming and going be closely monitored, so will all our financial transactions.

    Taking your money out of the country physically or electronically is strictly regulated by the eagle eyes of the FBI, the CIA, the Department of Homeland Security, and, you would never guess, the IRS as well. Violations of currency transaction laws, even when not associated with any criminal activity, are severely punished. Expatriation is frowned upon. Currency controls— limits on all overseas transactions and purchases— are commonplace in a faltering economy with a falling currency, which we will have to deal with one day.

    A tight border policy to keep certain people out is one thing, but tight border control to limit our ability to leave when we please is something else. America is already working on an electronic financial curtain, which I predict will steadily get worse. The leaders of neither the Republican nor the Democratic party can expect to protect our civil liberties when times get tough: Both support illegal wars; both support Patriot Act suppression of our privacy; both strongly endorse the multitrillion dollar bailout of Wall Street. Neither party will protect our right to vote with our feet and take our money with us. The right of a citizen to leave the country any time with his wealth and without government interference is a sharp dividing line between a free society and a dictatorship.

    We must be vigilant when the cry is for closed borders, since such a policy may turn out to be more harmful to us than those who come here illegally. The Patriot Act did great harm to the liberties of the American people, and that sacrifice has not made us safer. Arizona-type immigration legislation can turn out to be harmful. Being able to stop any American citizen under the vague charge of “suspicion” is dangerous, even more so in the age of secret prisons and a stated position of assassinating American citizens if deemed a “threat,” without charges ever being made. The Real ID, supported by those demanding stricter control of our borders, was rejected by many because it was eventually seen as a step toward a national ID card.

    There’s no reason to assume that any single group of hardworking Americans won’t accept the principles of a free society. That’s what most immigrants seek regardless of the color of their skin. Why shouldn’t they be open to the arguments of defending private property, free markets, sound money, right to life, low taxes, less war, protection of civil liberties, and especially a foreign policy designed for peace rather than perpetual war?

    Some conservatives and Republicans, in my view, insult many minorities by appealing for their votes only by trying to outdo the Democrats with giveaway programs. Why shouldn’t a strong message of personal liberty, self-reliance, and economic opportunity be appealing to immigrants as well as lifelong citizens? With the total failure of the welfare state and our foreign policy, it will become more evident that the door is wide open for the solutions that a free society provides.
    Last edited by presence; 04-11-2016 at 09:22 AM.

    'We endorse the idea of voluntarism; self-responsibility: Family, friends, and churches to solve problems, rather than saying that some monolithic government is going to make you take care of yourself and be a better person. It's a preposterous notion: It never worked, it never will. The government can't make you a better person; it can't make you follow good habits.' - Ron Paul 1988

    Awareness is the Root of Liberation Revolution is Action upon Revelation

    'Resistance and Disobedience in Economic Activity is the Most Moral Human Action Possible' - SEK3

    Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo.

    ...the familiar ritual of institutional self-absolution...
    ...for protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment...


  14. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by presence View Post
    "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to presence again."

  15. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by presence View Post
    Thanks! +Rep!

  16. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by presence View Post

    YES PRESENCE


    as in non citizens can be present in the country; "green card with asterisk" "establish visitor work program"
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=OfJFcSF80dE
    http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/border-security/
    also, no active search of the interior for "illegals"; it would be too costly financially and to liberty to
    So, Ron Paul does not use the term "presence", that is your interpretation?
    Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  17. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    So, Ron Paul does not use the term "presence", that is your interpretation?
    "presence" is not Ron's word its how I fit this concept into a bold print line item meme:

    13) The police should not be prohibited from determining an individual’s citizenship if the person is caught participating in a crime. This is far different from stopping anyone any time and demanding the individual present documentation of a legal status. That invokes the principle of “reasonable cause,” not reasonable suspicion.
    That would imply an "illegal immigrant" can be present,
    within the interior, without fear of summary molestation,
    so long as they commit no crime and seek no public benefit:
    If they have been detain for non crime,
    they should be issued a green card with an asterisk.
    Their sponsor cannot be compelled to report them.

    'We endorse the idea of voluntarism; self-responsibility: Family, friends, and churches to solve problems, rather than saying that some monolithic government is going to make you take care of yourself and be a better person. It's a preposterous notion: It never worked, it never will. The government can't make you a better person; it can't make you follow good habits.' - Ron Paul 1988

    Awareness is the Root of Liberation Revolution is Action upon Revelation

    'Resistance and Disobedience in Economic Activity is the Most Moral Human Action Possible' - SEK3

    Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo.

    ...the familiar ritual of institutional self-absolution...
    ...for protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment...


  18. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by presence View Post
    "presence" is not Ron's word its how I fit this concept into a bold print line item meme:



    That would imply an "illegal immigrant" can be present,
    within the interior, without fear of summary molestation,
    so long as they commit no crime and seek no public benefit:
    If they have been detain for non crime,
    they should be issued a green card with an asterisk.
    Their sponsor cannot be compelled to report them.
    It's clear, not just from that quote, but from several others, that you're right about Ron's position on this. He is for allowing non-criminal illegal immigrants to stay and work in the US without there being any practical way to find and deport them. He is even for giving legal status via a green card with an asterisk to them, although there doesn't seem to be much incentive for any to pursue that if Ron's other policies were adopted.

  19. #18

    Default

    That would imply an "illegal immigrant" can be present,
    within the interior, without fear of summary molestation,
    so long as they commit no crime and seek no public benefit:
    If they have been detain for non crime,
    they should be issued a green card with an asterisk.
    Their sponsor cannot be compelled to report them.
    I'd like to note that was my condensing other points, those words above are mine not Ron's directly.

    'We endorse the idea of voluntarism; self-responsibility: Family, friends, and churches to solve problems, rather than saying that some monolithic government is going to make you take care of yourself and be a better person. It's a preposterous notion: It never worked, it never will. The government can't make you a better person; it can't make you follow good habits.' - Ron Paul 1988

    Awareness is the Root of Liberation Revolution is Action upon Revelation

    'Resistance and Disobedience in Economic Activity is the Most Moral Human Action Possible' - SEK3

    Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo.

    ...the familiar ritual of institutional self-absolution...
    ...for protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment...


  20. #19

    Default

    In another thread, a couple alt-right/Trump supporter types gave me neg reps for saying this:
    Preferably, we should be able to do all that without any passport. But having everyone in North America be able to travel without restrictions everywhere else on the continent, including working in all other countries, is definitely a good thing that no Ron Paul supporter should oppose.
    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...=1#post6191958

    They said I misrepresented Ron Paul.

    I think that here with Ron Paul's own words before us, we can safely say I didn't misrepresent him in any way.

  21. #20

    Default

    Liberty Defined was an interesting moment. While Ron really didn't change his positions, he slightly changed emphasis. Some say that up to this point he had been catering to immigration conservatives. Some say that this was a change to cater to the left in his second run. And some were so outraged they changed their "ratings" of Ron based upon this.

    Tempest in a teapot. It wasn't a huge change, just some emphasis on compassion (in an election year). And we never know just how much any book is ghost-written.

    Commentary on the Immigration chapter:

    ...federal mandates require states to provide free medical and educational benefits to illegals; a weak economy exaggerates the economic consequences of legal and illegal immigration...
    Economic conditions have not gotten any better since then.

    Illegals are counted in the census, creating a situation where they can statistically add up to several congressional districts. Texas, for instance, gained four new seats after the 2010 census was completed and this was, to a large degree, a reflection of our immigration policies.
    Interestingly, the Supreme Court recently unanimously ruled (opinion written by Ginsberg), that illegal immigrants can be counted when creating congressional districts. Don't know if Ron has commented on that decision, but it makes the practice he identified above "official".

    In the ideal libertarian world, borders would be blurred and open. It would be something similar to what the Constitution did with the borders between the various states. Civilization has not yet come even close to being capable of such a policy, though it engages some in a theoretical discussion.
    Ron says we are not even close to a world where borders would be blurred and open. I agree.

    Under today’s circumstances, with a government-precipitated recession (a depression for those who earn under $30,000 a year) and promises
    of welfare, obviously some rules are required.

    It’s important to note that the greatest resentment comes from government-mandated free services and a government-created unemployment
    crisis. Fix these two problems and finding a scapegoat for our economic crisis wouldn’t be necessary.
    And these problems have not been fixed. The prerequisite of ending the welfare state first has not be achieved.

    A free and prosperous economy always looks for labor; immigrant workers would be needed and welcomed. This need could be managed by a generous guest worker program, not by illegal immigrants receiving benefits for the family and securing an easy route to permanent citizenship and thus becoming pawns of partisan political interests.
    More prerequisites. The economy is not "free" or "prosperous" for the majority of Americans. And government benefits still exist.

    But if a rancher on our border wants to stop trespassers on his land, he is forbidden to do so. The Feds don’t even allow the state law
    enforcement officers to interfere!
    Another issue that has not been corrected yet.

    Many claim that illegal immigrants take American jobs. This is true, but most of the jobs they “take” are the ones unemployed Americans refuse
    at the wage offered. Rarely is this even minimum wage; it’s usually higher.
    Ron agrees that immigration takes jobs that American's won't take or are not offered. Welfare and government assistance is one huge reason for that, which is why that has long been a prerequisite. There are certainly other reasons as well, but those are a result of human nature (favoritism), not government action.

    My humble suggestions on what to do follow:
    The solutions from Ron. Are they prioritized?

    Restore our economy to a healthy free market with sound money and eliminate deficit-financed government. A vibrant economy will minimize
    the problems and produce a high demand for both domestic and immigrant labor.
    Prerequisite number one.

    Abolish the welfare state. The incentive to always take a job—at whatever wage available—must prevail.
    Prerequisite number two. Agree.

    Enforce the laws now on the books with more border guards; permit states to enforce the law; allow landowners to provide private property
    security assistance, just as we do every day throughout the United States, and to work with Federal Border Control authorities. Private
    landowners have a right to post No Trespassing signs on their property to achieve this.
    Prerequisite number three.

    Do not grant automatic citizenship to children of illegal immigrants born in the United States, deliberately or accidentally.
    Prerequisite number four.

    Stop all federal mandates on the states to provide free education and medical care for illegal immigrants.
    Prerequisite number five.

    Bilingualism should always be voluntary and not compelled by law.
    New proposal, no doubt intended to abolish government mandates.

    Don’t punish third parties for not being keen to act as law enforcement agents in regard to illegal immigration. Blaming American employers
    and fining them for hiring an individual, directly or indirectly, possibly with a counterfeit identification, strikes me as a compulsory servitude not
    permitted under the Constitution. Determining who is legal or not is a police and court function, not a responsibility of private business.
    Enforcing law is not the legal responsibility of every individual. Fully agree. We should have no mandates for citizens to become law enforcers. Applies to traffic law as well as other law. It should not be a legal responsibility of every citizen to drop what they are doing and chase a bank robber down the street, or to report a car that is driving too fast.

    Let me be clear now that I am diverging into my opinion, not something written by Ron. There are quite a few requirements and liabilities that occur when persons enter into a contract. Some valid, some bureaucratic nonsense. Businesses already deal with this on a daily basis. Like Ron, I am not a fan of a new US or UN ID. But many forms of identification already exist. When hiring people it is often required to verify identity and citizenship. I have no problem with that continuing until all prerequisites have been accomplished. I don't know that Ron would disagree with that, with prerequisites not met.

    End the drug war.
    Amen. The drug war was the great destroyer of liberty and huge waste of money. It could be argued that the unending war on terror has or will soon exceed the damage caused by the drug war.

    It’s time to break up the coalition of the religious drug warriors and the drug dealers who fight any effort to decriminalize drugs.
    Preaching to the choir!

    Immigrants who can’t be sent back due to the magnitude of the problem should not be given citizenship—no amnesty should be granted. Maybe a “green card” with an asterisk could be issued. This in-between status, keeping illegal immigrants in limbo, will be condemned by the welfare left as being too harsh and condemned by the confused right as being too generous. It will be said that it will create a class of second-class citizens.
    "Maybe" doesn't seem like a full endorsement of this idea.

    Those immigrants, legal or illegal, who incite violence or commit crimes of violence should be prosecuted under the law and lose their right to stay in this country. The police should not be prohibited from determining an individual’s citizenship if the person is caught participating in a crime. This is far different from stopping anyone anytime and demanding the individual present documentation of a legal status.
    Agree. The enforcement would require some changes, as sanctuary cities and other government workarounds and officials, such as Obama himself, prevent the law from being enforced. Stopping anyone at any time and interior checkpoints is a violation of the spirit and letter of law (Constitution, 4th Amendment).

    Another concern I have with the immigration issue is that the strong border protection proponents are as interested in regulating our right to
    freely exit
    the country as they are in preventing illegal entry. No longer can we travel even to Canada or Mexico without a U.S. passport. Our
    government keeps tabs on our every move, which involves a lot more than looking for drug dealers, illegal immigrants, or stopping a potential
    terrorist.

    Financial controls have been growing since the 1970s, and as the financial crisis worsens, not only will our coming and going be closely
    monitored, so will all our financial transactions.

    Taking your money out of the country physically or electronically is strictly regulated by the eagle eyes of the FBI, the CIA, the Department of Homeland Security, and, you would never guess, the IRS as well.
    ...
    A tight border policy to keep certain people out is one thing, but tight border control to limit our ability to leave when we please is something else.
    Agree. Very big concerns there. And this is obviously about the rights of Americans to exit. It is not about opening the borders for any and all to enter. It is certainly not advocacy for a North American Union.
    Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  22. #21

    Default

    After getting quite the education about ghost-writers for politicians' books, including Ron's, and handing someone your name to use on a newsletter, without knowing what went in it, I trust interviews now much more than I trust the former.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  23. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    It is not about opening the borders for any and all to enter. It is certainly not advocacy for a North American Union.
    Its about opening the border for anyone that:

    doesn't commit crime,
    doesn't ask for a government handout, and
    has a private place where they are welcome.

    As long as you have a legit place to go... its an open door policy.

    Beggars get the ban hammer.

    'We endorse the idea of voluntarism; self-responsibility: Family, friends, and churches to solve problems, rather than saying that some monolithic government is going to make you take care of yourself and be a better person. It's a preposterous notion: It never worked, it never will. The government can't make you a better person; it can't make you follow good habits.' - Ron Paul 1988

    Awareness is the Root of Liberation Revolution is Action upon Revelation

    'Resistance and Disobedience in Economic Activity is the Most Moral Human Action Possible' - SEK3

    Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo.

    ...the familiar ritual of institutional self-absolution...
    ...for protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment...


  24. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by presence View Post
    Its about opening the border for anyone that:

    doesn't commit crime,
    doesn't ask for a government handout, and
    has a private place where they are welcome.

    As long as you have a legit place to go... its an open door policy.

    Beggars get the ban hammer.
    I was specifically referencing a quote from Ron's book. And that quote was about American's right to exit.
    Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  25. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by presence View Post
    Its about opening the border for anyone that:

    doesn't commit crime,
    doesn't ask for a government handout, and
    has a private place where they are welcome.

    As long as you have a legit place to go... its an open door policy.

    Beggars get the ban hammer.
    I don't think that is true at all. Ron's primary concern seems to be in not creating something here that would make it harder for American citizens to get out of the country.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  26. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    After getting quite the education about ghost-writers for politicians' books, including Ron's, and handing someone your name to use on a newsletter, without knowing what went in it, I trust interviews now much more than I trust the former.
    Here's a recent Ron Paul Liberty Report, pretty much unscripted:

    When Does Open Immigration Become An Invasion?



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CE5doLAWJZ8

    Quick summary of the Ron Paul Liberty Report video:

    In the first two minutes, Ron says that he is neither for open borders or totally closed borders, and that he likes to look at it from an economic perspective, and that the US economy is bad. He then goes into the welfare state problem and welfare state mandates and incentives, and that nothing will be solved unless the economy gets better.

    Ron later describes a potential ideal situation with a Bracero type arrangement (temporary labor, no citizenship). McDaniel's (who was Ron's immigration staff specialist) later states bluntly "you were not an open borders person".

    Ron also criticizes e-verify, the futility of a bigger "wall" and birthright citizenship. He mentions the absurdity of Trump's plan to intercept the money that poor workers send to Mexico, and is not fond of demagogueing and scapegoating.
    Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  27. #26

    Default

    No one I ever met had a problem with a few illegals coming across the border, back before NAFTA. Many worked for 1/2 the year and went home. No big deal. It was after NAFTA, that the huge deluge started.

    In the video, as is usual, Ron mixes philosophy nirvana with where we are right now. Yes, getting rid of the handouts to illegal aliens would be the ideal, in addition to improving the economy. In the meantime, it doesn't sound to me like he agrees with letting them continue to flood over. In fact, he clearly states he is against open borders.

    He mentions the absurdity of Trump's plan to intercept the money that poor workers send to Mexico, and is not fond of demagogueing and scapegoating.
    I think Ron should meet with the loved ones of Americans who were murdered by illegal aliens, in addition to ranchers who live close to the border and have their land and homes invaded by illegals. But, that is an aside.
    Last edited by LibertyEagle; 04-11-2016 at 01:43 PM.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  28. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    No one I ever met had a problem with a few illegals coming across the border, back before NAFTA. Many worked for 1/2 the year and went home. No big deal. It was after NAFTA, that the huge deluge started.
    This is true, and not only from our side but from economic havoc created in Mexico from NAFTA.

  29. #28

    Default

    Step by step piecemeal stealth implementation of the NAU/NWO.

    The flock will never figure it out until it's too late to resist it.

  30. #29

    Default

    Judging by this new episode of the Liberty Report, Ron Paul agrees with Swiss libertarian Claudio Grass that mass immigration is a threat, and that putting more troops on the border is part of the solution. Part of the reasoning is the defense of Swiss culture. The rise and threat of Cultural Marxism is also discussed.

    Here is the thread about this episode:
    What Do The Swiss Know That We Don't?

    Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  31. #30

    Default

    Ron Paul on borders during 2012 Presidential run:

    I do think we should deal with our borders. One way that I would suggest that we could do it is pay less attention to the borders between Afghanistan and Iraq and Pakistan and bring our troops home and deal with the border. But why do we pay more attention to the borders overseas and less attention to the borders here at home?
    ...
    http://www.ontheissues.org/Archive/2...mmigration.htm
    Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast





Select a tag for more discussion on that topic

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •