« Signed, signed, everything is signed... | Main | You buys your ticket and you takes your chances »

Questions For The Day

I understand that one thing which has united extremists on both the Left and Right sides of the aisle, is their contempt for President Bush's attempts to reform Immigration and establish a semblance of Border Security. But as I have mentioned before, Bush's plan is in many ways similar to one proposed by President Reagan. Something which many Bush-haters refuse to acknowledge, even though it is patently obvious to anyone who bothers to check the facts. The reason for this is obvious; Conservatives revere Reagan and desperately want to avoid acknowledging any similarity by President Bush to their patron saint. Liberals desperately fear the Reagan aura, and desperately want to avoid acknowledging any similarity by President Bush to their most feared adversary.

But it occurs to me to note further, that besides having a similar point of view on this question, both men were better informed than most people on the issue - both Reagan and Bush served as Governors of large border states who have had to face the illegal immigrant issue head-on, without the luxury of passing the buck a la McCain or playing political Rottweiler a la Tancredo. In short, Reagan and Bush were each far more qualified to speak with authority than many of the talking heads in the media or Congress.

My questions for today are these:

1. Who, if anyone, of the major contenders for President has a demonstrable plan for dealing with Illegal Immigration and Border Security?

2. Considering that any bill which could become law will have to pass through Congress, where many a good idea has been perverted beyond recognition, what is the "best" possible bill which could actually become law in the next two years?

3. No bill dealing with Border Security or Immigration Reform can come into being without the President signing it. What approach would you recommend your advocate take in getting President Bush to sign the bill?

4. It can reasonably be said that a lot of the problem is not a need for new laws, nearly so much as it is a need for existing laws to be enforced, and enforced consistently. How would you persuade Congress to support improved enforcement initiatives?


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Questions For The Day:

» The Thunder Run linked with Web Reconnaissance for 05/09/2007

Comments (124)

1. Jeb.2. Amnesty.... (Below threshold)
kim:

1. Jeb.

2. Amnesty.

3. Yo Mama says sign.

4. Yo Mama says obey the law.
================

Ouch, all that structure hu... (Below threshold)
kim:

Ouch, all that structure hurt my brain.
=======================

1. none2. none... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

1. none

2. none

3. none

4. No legal means exists that would be effective in doing this.

When you get ready to have a real discussion turn the sandbox rules off.

I don't know, Mac, structur... (Below threshold)
kim:

I don't know, Mac, structure is good, and he's repressed the desire to delete me, lately.
=======================

Jeb is a major contender, t... (Below threshold)
kim:

Jeb is a major contender, though unwilling, and amnesty is most just combined with foregoing enforcement of the law. It will take moral authority to accomplish this, hence Yo Mama.
===============================

You see, his format forced ... (Below threshold)
kim:

You see, his format forced me to think. I was just going to advise you to learn Spanish and rejoice that everyone wants to come here.
=============================

I'm big on discipline, Mac.... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

I'm big on discipline, Mac.

You can always post on WizBlue if you want to go at this another way, n'cest pas?

The candidate who promises ... (Below threshold)
kim:

The candidate who promises amnesty and future fairness.... well, you fill in the blanks.
===========================

Re: #2The problem ... (Below threshold)

Re: #2

The problem with any bill passed is those in Congress who merely sign on because they have ensured the wording leaves ample opportunity to introduce all manner of amendments to the bill afterwards. This is exactly what happened after the last "amnesty" program in the eighties. Dates were extended, different groups were specifically named and added with different requirements, deadlines were extended again, etc. Effectively, the old program became nearly open ended and a free for all. It was seen by many as another "living document".

Yet still, there were many who did not take advantage of all the opportunities and chances they had to become citizens and finally, when they found themselves between a rock and a hard place, a whole new crop of immigration lawyers were born to find ways to circumvent the laws for their illegal clients.

That is my biggest concern. That whatever terms they may come to agreement on, it will mean little when they decide it needs tweaking and changing, which will likely be before the ink is dry.

1) Paul, Tancredo (unsure a... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

1) Paul, Tancredo (unsure about Huckabee'S exact position, but he doesn't suffer fools gladly, so...)

2) install a database reconciling SSN to name and birthdate. Log in using co. name or dba or merchants' number. At log -out it will be a felony (or BIG fine) not to check either [valid] or [invalid](the database already "knows"). If invalid, type in the applicant's proffered name, address, ph.# (while smiling encouragingly in Pedro's direction); fence; raids; felonize employers; no bank accounts unless SSN reconciled; no Western Union currency transactions unless SSN verified, billboards and ad campaigns (switch gov't AdCoucil away from teen PC meme)

3) Call him Esau. Perhaps Enemy of the People.

4) Picket their family homes. If they do like it, throw them a retirement bash. At their family home.

Good post, DJ. Clear, concise...(Unlike mine. I could have gone on even further)

Duncan Hunter seems to have... (Below threshold)
Jeff Blogworthy:

Duncan Hunter seems to have the most forceful message to date:

"If you're looking for a candidate who will build the wall on the Mexican border and will put a stop to illegal immigration, I'd encourage you to take a hard look at my candidacy. I built the border fence in San Diego and proved that it works. I wrote the Secure Fence Act to extend the San Diego fence 854 miles across California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas. It's now the law. However, construction of the fence is going far too slowly. If elected President, I pledge to you that I will complete the border fence in six months."

My belief is that the border should be secured first - immediately. Then we can talk about what to do about the illegal aliens who are here.

Forgive me for trampling ov... (Below threshold)
brainy435:

Forgive me for trampling over the structure here, but I wanted to address this:
"But as I have mentioned before, Bush's plan is in many ways similar to one proposed by President Reagan. Something which many Bush-haters refuse to acknowledge, even though it is patently obvious to anyone who bothers to check the facts. The reason for this is obvious; Conservatives revere Reagan and desperately want to avoid acknowledging any similarity by President Bush to their patron saint."

I have seen and heard MANY people on the right say that the Bush plan resembles Regans. The reason we hate it anyway is that we don't think Regans worked all that well. It's the "fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me" principle: When Regans passed we were assured there would be a tightening of boarder security afterwards to make sure we wouldn't need another amnesty in 20 years.

Anyone taken a look at a calendar or an immigration report lately?

Repeat after me....."nothin... (Below threshold)
Ray:

Repeat after me....."nothing will change until immigration is reduced". Bush is full of crap when he talks about fighting illegal immigration, he wants more and more and more people flooding our country, especially "his people" - Latinos.

When politicians say they want to "secure the border" then mean, make it safe, easy and LEGAL for half of the narco-nation of Mexico and Central America to flood into the US, that's what they mean.

And don't forget, Muslim immigration is growing too. Remember, the more Muslims, the more Sharia law we will see sneaking into our culture.

1. None of them. Tancredo'... (Below threshold)

1. None of them. Tancredo's got the right idea, but too many people find his candor unpalatable.

2. The one that prioritizes the rights of current citizens and those holding legal immigrant status. This won't happen because the Culture of Incumbancy, and the belief that amnesty for illegals is the key to a lifeling job with unbeatable perks. Let's face it: congress is filled with people who have never held a lucrative job outside of congress, and aren't cut out to do much else besides advocate, agitate and obfuscate.

3. President Bush will not sign a bill that doesn't include amnesty in some form or another. Wrongfully, he believes that illegals, particularly Latino illegals, will vote Republican because of the GOP's strong commitment to marriage and family issues. I think we now know that many are here for the healthcare and education entitlements, not a desire for "a better life" or a desire to be an American citizen. This indicates a likelihood to vote for Democrat candidates, for obvious reasons.

4. By tying retention of their jobs to voting for bills that are in the best interests of the U.S. legal citizens. If they want blanket amnesty, they can advocate for it in the private sector, not the congress.

b435, oyster has an explana... (Below threshold)
kim:

b435, oyster has an explanation for why Reagan's plan didn't work out so well.

I like bD's encouraging smile to Pedro. That would change behaviour in a hurry.
==========================

langtry, you have a point, ... (Below threshold)
kim:

langtry, you have a point, but latina don't come here to work on the plantation.
===============================

brainy, Ray, thank you both... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

brainy, Ray, thank you both so much for demonstrating why it is so difficult to discuss this issue with any sense of optimism. That is, the incessant whining and paranoid delusion from certain partisans.

DJ Drummond, ... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

DJ Drummond,

No, because that's like saying go to hell.

Indeed! My post belongs und... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

Indeed! My post belongs under "Signed, Signed...Everything!"

Hell hath no faery like the... (Below threshold)
kim:

Hell hath no faery like the shorn wisdom.
=======================

Mac, why are you dissing Wi... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Mac, why are you dissing WizBlue? I've been there a few times, and some of the articles are good, albeit from a Left-wing POV.

And if I wanted to say 'go to hell', I'd use references to Paris or Los Angeles, you know, be obvious about it.

brainy, Ray, thank... (Below threshold)
J.R.:
brainy, Ray, thank you both so much for demonstrating why it is so difficult to discuss this issue with any sense of optimism. That is, the incessant whining and paranoid delusion from certain partisans.
DJ, I'm not sure why you would lump brainy into your characterization of partisan (at least that's how I read it). He makes a very fair point, one I would have made as well had he not said it already.

I completely disagree with your characterization here:

The reason for this is obvious; Conservatives revere Reagan and desperately want to avoid acknowledging any similarity by President Bush to their patron saint.

You're talking about whining and partisanship and fail to even consider that conservatives realize that Reagan's plan didn't work whatsoever and don't want another redo of the same thing!

Now to address your topics:
1. Duncan Hunter, although I would hardly consider him a candidate

2. Sorry I don't think one exists yet.

3. I don't believe the President can be swayed into accepting a bill I would want my advocate to sign.

4. I find this query puzzling. Why do we need enforcement initiatives from Congress? They are already there.

That's the major problem with this debate, those for amnesty think that since we have been looking the other way for so long that we shouldn't be allowed to just start enforcing laws that are already and have been in place.

Langtry is right. Tancred... (Below threshold)
Ray:

Langtry is right. Tancredo is mostly right on this issue but most people find his blunt candor hard to take. That's unfortunate.

DJ - sorry but I live in the Islamic "capital" of the US - Dearborn, Michigan so I've seen first-hand what unrestricted muslim immigration does to a town and region. You get sharia law and ancient customs pushed endlessly. You get women and girls walking around in near "burkas". You get increased segregation between men and women. You get polygamy. You get the media and many politicians bending over backwards to pander to the "immigrants". Bottom line: they don't assimilate well. They expect us to assimilate to them. Islam will win.

I think history is going to... (Below threshold)
kim:

I think history is going to find Reagan and Bush to have been very similar, though one more articulate than the other, and one clearly an intellect rather than an executive.
====================================

1. Hunter2. Force ... (Below threshold)
horse:

1. Hunter

2. Force employers to use the pilot program to verify employee legality, seal the border.

3. If Bush gives a damn at all about Republicans winning in the future, sign it.

4. Raise my taxes for proper security and enforcement, but only if there is no amnesty.

The biggest problem here is a sizable percent of the citizens of the USA do not want to give amnesty and citizenship to the 10-20 MM illegals. Another large chunk is somewhat indifferent to amnesty, but would like border security. Many in these two camps are conservative and likely vote Republican.

Bush spent the first 5 years ignoring the problem with rising illegals in this country and actually decreased enforcement, until recently. His actions encouraged more illegals to come here. As a result, many conservatives do not trust him or other republicans on this issue.

There is already a working program that allows employers to easily check on their new hires for legality. It is called the pilot program and some companies like Dunkin Donuts are already using it successfully.

Enforcing legal employment and border security are very doable, if that is what the Bush government wanted. Illegals would stop coming here and some here would leave. A few years after this is in place, then there can be a discussion about allowing the remaining illegals to work here legally, but without citizenship as an option.

I would vote for a democrat if they promised the above and the republican did not. I would rather have higher taxes and surrender in Iraq than have 20 MM illegals and an open border destroy the working class and civil society of America, as is happening in the border and coastal states.

Perot had it wrong, that sucking sound is the USA inviting and rewarding the criminals and unskilled to create a third world environment right here.

"brainy, Ray, thank you bot... (Below threshold)
brainy435:

"brainy, Ray, thank you both so much for demonstrating why it is so difficult to discuss this issue with any sense of optimism. That is, the incessant whining and paranoid delusion from certain partisans."
DJ Drummond

Wow. Must have hit a nerve there, or something.

DJ, I didn't realize that for you to discuss this issue with "any sense of optimism" you had to rely blindly on false assumptions and lash out at those who would unfairly point them out.

You are missing, or ducking... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

You are missing, or ducking, my point J.R. Reagan and Bush, for all the noise, knew what they were doing. These were not the idiots who talk without experience, but men who had worked on the problem long before they ever became President. Their programs failed for three reasons:

1 - The separate issues of Border Control, Illegal residence, Citizen documentation, and INS restrucuring were ignored and rolled together to create an artificial monster which could not be comprehsively addressed by a single bill;

2 - The media went into paranoid hysterics, turning the offenders into some kind of victim. Neither party was willing to challenge that lie;

3 - The GOP has no party discipline, but deserts the President, whether Bush or Reagan, the minute they are pressured. We could have reformed the Tax Code, Social Security, Immigration, and the Borders with the majority in Congress, but instead personal egos ran amok and now it's Republi-weasels like McCain and Tancredo trying to make deals with such "honorable" people as Pelosi and Reid. The Democrats do have party discipline, but have no intention of addressing a problem which - to their mind - means a demographic base of new voters for them.

Ray, the problem with Tancredo is that he demands everyone sign on to his plan, or else he tries to sabotage anyone else's plan. Tancredo is not the President, and judging by his utter lack of tact and real-world comprehension he is not fit to be POTUS either.

What we need is a plan that works, not another me-first political game. For that to happen, the GOP needs to get behind the President. If you think trashing Dubya is going to be a winning plan, wait until he's gone and see what you have to work with. I promise you now, it won't be an improvement.

brainy435 - I'm just not a ... (Below threshold)
Ray:

brainy435 - I'm just not a naive kid, that's all. I've studied and lived this topic for several years now. All major politicians are bad on illegal immigration - Bush may be the worst on it. (However, I tend to agree with him on other topics).

Bush wants to push the North American Union, no question. Ask yourself, why do we see Spanish on the packaging of almost everything we purchase nowadays? Why do we see signs in Spanish popping up? Why do we see a lack of willingness to enforce laws against illegals? Why do we see Border Patrol officers being prosecuted all of a sudden?

Our forefathers struggled for this? Loss of liberty? Loss of representative government? The "experts" want to harmonize laws between Canada, Mexico and the USA to further increase business activity and profit.

NAU baby.....the elites want a virtual fence, which is perfect for a virtual country because that's all we will be. The USA - in name only....

DJ - as much as I like Tanc... (Below threshold)
Ray:

DJ - as much as I like Tancredo (and Hunter), neither is going to be POTUS. The only real choices are Romney, McCain or Rudy or Hilary or Obama. (maybe, maybe F. Thompson)

They are all bad on illegal immigration and assimilation - Romney may be the best of the lot. The public is pushing back at the elites but we can do little when they simply don't want to enforce the law. Learn Spanish and get a Muslim prayer rug.

Naw, Ray, it'll be hemisphe... (Below threshold)
kim:

Naw, Ray, it'll be hemisphere against hemisphere and we'll be greatful for all those romance language co-religionists streaming through borders in our defense.
=====================

Greatful or Dead.===... (Below threshold)
kim:

Greatful or Dead.
===========

Despite my being a conserva... (Below threshold)

Despite my being a conservative that votes Republican, I am also a New Mexican. Thus, if the November 2008 Presidential race comes down to John McCain versus Bill Richardson, I just might vote Richardson.

It's not that I like Richardson that much, though he is, IMO, the best Democrat of the bunch, having come out of the highly practical political machine here. Plus, he already has to deal with the foreign nationals here illegally.

It's that I dislike McCain just that much.

However, I wouldn't mind seeing him vice-prez.

Oh, yeah, DJ, about Bush; d... (Below threshold)
kim:

Oh, yeah, DJ, about Bush; don't it alway seem to go, you don't know what you got 'til it's gone.
=========================

Watch mantis weigh in. Unl... (Below threshold)
kim:

Watch mantis weigh in. Unless it's Biden.
===========================

Governors of border states ... (Below threshold)
kim:

Governors of border states is a recurrent theme. Good one, DJ.
=======================================

1. Ahnuld.2. Ann... (Below threshold)
kim:

1. Ahnuld.

2. Annex Austria.

3. Strongarm him.

4. Suggest something about their women and children.
=========================

Kim - you're drinking that ... (Below threshold)
Ray:

Kim - you're drinking that Kool-Aid again! We're gonna use our 6th grade educated Mestizo to fight the jihadists and the Chinese? Ah, those two foes are quite intelligent and clever, lest I remind you.

The invasion is about more banal things Kim - simply cheap labor, ala 19th century plantation owners in the deep south, nothing more. Increased profits due to illegal labor.

DJ: Frankly, pessimism is w... (Below threshold)

DJ: Frankly, pessimism is what we've been taught over decades. No one trusts the government to do anything right; and for good reason. They have an abyssmal record up to this point. Your own statement "...where many a good idea has been perverted beyond recognition,..." says it. This is not an exception, but the rule.

I would personally like to see the borders secured. Then, and only then, make a decision as to what to do about the illegals here now and actually enforce it.

When Reagan's amnesty program came into effect it was estimated that there were 3 million illegals elligible for a path to citizenship. About 1.3 million actually applied and a full third of those were suspected to have had fraudulent documentation and were put through the system anyway. The INS was overwhelmed with 1.3 million. The other 1.7 million are likely still here and still illegal.

Today a conservative guess is ten million. And we are to be optimistic? When all the focus is put on how to get them legalized and nothing but bickering about stemming the flow?

The Chinese haven't got Abr... (Below threshold)
kim:

The Chinese haven't got Abraham, and Ishmael's cult hasn't been enlightened. No contest.
========================

Everyone was behind the pre... (Below threshold)
horse:

Everyone was behind the president; until he declared he was taking a left turn on immigration. He then pouted when most everyone else hopped off his leftward going train.

What did he expect? It was like him saying he was going to raise taxes 10%, nationalize health care, or decrease military spending.

Nice try, but that's a lie,... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Nice try, but that's a lie, horse.

Kinda like the Dem's 'We Support the Troops' myth.

Watch mantis weigh in. U... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Watch mantis weigh in. Unless it's Biden.

No, you're right, it's Richardson. You win the prize!

Every now and then I can he... (Below threshold)
kim:

Every now and then I can herd cats.
======================

#2. The best bill would cl... (Below threshold)
NellE:

#2. The best bill would close the borders to illegals,including the anchor baby gate.
It would also take into account that we need a much bigger, more efficient system for guest workers. Lots of the illegals don't even care about citizenship; they want to live in their own countries as much as they can, and come here to work and make more money than they can make at home. I wish we'd stop hyperventilating about 12 million or 20 million wanting amnesty and citizenship, and just make sure enough people can come and go legally so that we can employ them legally, collect taxes and social security, monitor them while they are here, and limit their stay if we want to. Then those who actually want citizenship can get in line, and wait years like everyone else does, without fear. We can gradually increase the cost of employing them by requiring health care and benefits, so that as their own economies eventually improve (I can hope), the problems will naturally shrink.

You're right on the mark Oy... (Below threshold)
Ray:

You're right on the mark Oyster but please, don't be fooled by the 10, 11, 12 million figure. It's much closer to 20 million. Back in '05, Bear Sterns (the big financial group) did a study of illegal immigration and estimated (back then) the number to be 20 million.

The figure is low-balled in order on lull the public to sleep and not get them too upset that Mexico is invading our country. But hey as Kim believes, we're just all North Americans anyway! Laws are so mean spirited, boo-hoo. :(

You are missing, o... (Below threshold)
J.R.:
You are missing, or ducking, my point J.R. Reagan and Bush, for all the noise, knew what they were doing.
Actually, I'm not ducking anything, I just think you're wrong. I'm not talking about noise, Reagan's plan didn't work. Period. It had the opposite affect of what was supposed to happen, so apparently he applied his knowledge incorrectly. So why should anyone expect Bush's plan which you state is almost the same as Reagan's to work now?
What we need is a plan that works, not another me-first political game. For that to happen, the GOP needs to get behind the President.
So tell me, what is a conservative, like myself who usually votes Republican to do when they completely disagree with the President's approach?
Wow DJ, nice showing how th... (Below threshold)
horse:

Wow DJ, nice showing how that is a lie. Your form of discussion is so persuasive.

With amnesty for illegals Bush pulled a liberal turd out of a hat and tried to convince us it was a soufflé. Along with a couple of other gaffes, he caused great worry with conservatives before the 2006 elections. Who knows how much that affected the results, but it probably wasn't positive.

Again, what did he expect? It was like he nominated an unqualified crony for the supreme court, or allowed a Muslim based company to run our ports, or pushed through a new unneeded medical program at huge costs. Oh wait, he did do those things... Big surprise we could see that amnesty turd for what it was.

First off horse, Dubya has ... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

First off horse, Dubya has never changed his stance on Immigration Reform. The stance is the same in 2007 as it was when he ran in 2000. Thus you are lying.

Further, your determined effort to connect Dubya to things you know full wee he never advocated only demonstrates that you desire to disrupt the discussion, not pursue it.

You write as a troll, and so I shall treat you as one.

No big surprise I recognized your post for the turd it is; the smell gave it away before it hit the screen.

And calling a border fence,... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

And calling a border fence, increased border patrol budgets, and a plan which denies citizenship to illegals but requires all plans to give precedence to legal residents some kind of "amnesty", well, that's just stupid and only worth taunting.

Wrong question J.R.<p... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Wrong question J.R.

Stop bitching, learn the facts instead of whining about how impossible it is to do anything, and remember what your choices are.

You say you "completely disagree" with the President's apprach? What exactly is your malfunction? That is, what do you not understand and what exactly do you think is the alternative to supportiong Bush's plan?

Lying and calling it "amnesty" is useless and frankly juvenile.

Lying that the Democrats would do better is delusional.

Lying that narcissists like Tancredo even understand the problem fully is equally stupid.


Look, emotions run strong on this issue because it affects a lot of us. I live here in Houston, for crying out loud, where the City Council thought the best way to address the illegal problem was to build work centers for them. I have been in Texas for almost four decades, and I know that illegals sap utilities and resources, that many illegals are criminals and predators, that even the "good" illegals do not have insurance or regularly obey the rules which make society work. I'm not some pansy ivory-tower moron who thinks that we need to bend over for them.

But I also know that these are people, and they will respond according to what we do. There has to be a plan for separating the hard criminals from the soft ones, for getting the peaceful ones to buy into a plan which promises them something, for offering a plan which secures our borders and encourages participation and assimilation into American society, not hiding from it.

Bush's plan is not perfect, but it's the only one which considers both the short AND long term effects of the action, which offers opportunity for compliance, and which won't lead to massive expense and friction between federal and local governments, between the different races in-country, and avoids the stupidity of treating people, however unwanted, as animals.

Calling the President names and insulting a plan developed by professionals in National Security and the Justice Department, is hardly an alternative.

This is the best plan out there. Period.

DJ - Jorge's plan is nothin... (Below threshold)
Ray:

DJ - Jorge's plan is nothing but folly. He has been in office for six years and the situation is worse today than in past years. Why? Because he doesn't really want to stop the flow. He loves his "guest peasants". The "patrician" in him likes the idea of helping Jose and Maria, even though the crooks that run Meh-hee-co live like kings and don't invest squat in their own nation's infrastructure and needs.

Again, Jorge does not want to enforce the law because he doesn't want the flow stopped! Nothing much has changed since 18th century slavery...we've only exchanged "black" for "brown". How pathetic.

Must I say the obvious? T... (Below threshold)
Ray:

Must I say the obvious? The only appropriate punishment for illegal immigration is deportation. Everything else is amnesty. If a nation can't muster the courage to deport illegal aliens, it won't long remain a nation. It will only become a "region" with many languages, cultures, histories, etc. And that's what I believe the elites want.

The president did not have ... (Below threshold)
horse:

The president did not have to push the illegal amnesty deal, and that is what it was/is.

He could have stopped when everyone went, "Wooooo, lets not go down that road right now." But no, he had to have it his way and push it to the forefront of national politics. He made a big stink about it at a very bad time.

He is the one who said it had to be "comprehensive", which by his own words meant a path for the illegals to work here legally. What do you think that is, if not amnesty?

And he did not want a fence and was visibly unhappy when he signed the bill forced on him.

And he really supports the border agents by having his prosecutors put them in jail for shooting a dangerous criminal crossing the border.

Finally, he did not enforce the border or immigration until he wanted something. Bill Clinton did a better job with deporting illegals for crying out loud, Bill Clinton the phony!

Bush's actions/inactions speak volumes about this issue, and it all speaks away from protecting the working class.

The only trolls are leftists and rinos...

Wrong question J.R... (Below threshold)
J.R.:
Wrong question J.R.

Stop bitching, learn the facts instead of whining about how impossible it is to do anything, and remember what your choices are.

You say you "completely disagree" with the President's apprach? What exactly is your malfunction?


Well so much for honest discourse and debate without the name-calling and etc. Practice what you preach DJ!
This is the best plan out there. Period.
And all the others out there who disagree are whiny morons who don't have their facts straight. Got it. Thanks for setting the record straight.

Oh yeah, and foregoing the already lawful penalty of deportation for illegally entering the U.S. is not amnesty. Again, got it.

J.R., you continue to whine... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

J.R., you continue to whine, proving I was accurate.

What, pray tell, do you think the Mexican government does when we deport illegals?

Why do you think that works?

You prove my point - you don't get what you want, so you default to giving the Left what it wants. Nice move, slick.

horse, it is not amnesty and you know it. And I have still not seen you explain your own answer.

Ray, the quality of your posts is rebuttal in itself.

Finally, just read the stor... (Below threshold)
horse:

Finally, just read the stories on this site about the human cost paid by Americans at the hands of illegals, some who are criminals, some who are just negligent in part due to a lack of assimilation (i.e. reading English and passing drivers tests)

http://www.immigrationshumancost.org/text/crimevictims.html

Every day more of them come across the border and more Americans become victims, and amnesty is only going to encourage them. Any politician who supports this does not deserve a single vote.

"This is the best plan out ... (Below threshold)
brainy435:

"This is the best plan out there. Period. "

Isn't this what the left does in regards to Global Warming (TM)? DJ says he's right, so there can be no debate.

He's here to preach to the unwashed, so I'm not sure why he pretends to want the ignorant masses to answer questions.

DJ, giving criminals a free... (Below threshold)
horse:

DJ, giving criminals a free pass is the definition of amnesty. QED

horse, it's not a free pass... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

horse, it's not a free pass.

Is that lie the best you can come up with?

And brainy, I don't see you suggesting any constructive ideas, so I guess you figure 'bitch n' moan' is a plan?

DJ, I am merely commenting ... (Below threshold)
brainy435:

DJ, I am merely commenting on your juvenile conduct. I made a comment on what I saw as an error in your original assumption, and you promptly singled me out for an ad hominum attack. I would expect such things from a troll, but not a poster. I have been commenting here for a long time now, and while I may not agree with everything the other posters say or they may have disagreed with me in the past, I've never been attacked by them. I think it was a serious mistake to give you front page priviliges, if this is how you "debate."

If I thought my input would be valued or at least not used to beat me about the head and shoulders, I might add how I thought we needed serious efforts to stop further illegal boarder crossings, wether that be a fence or simply clearing up regulations so boarder patrol agents aren't jailed for doing their jobs, before we deal with the complex issues of what to do with the law-breakers already here. I'd add that any plan that requires illegals to go home and reapply for citizenship would not qualify as amnesty, but would reserve judgement until I saw the final legislation as to whether the Bush plan really did that or not.

But after all this, I don't trust you to argue in an honest fashion any longer. This is a very sad day for me, as I usually enjoy Wizbang a lot.

You're right DJ, expecting ... (Below threshold)
J.R.:

You're right DJ, expecting that we actually adhere to the laws we have already established is just whining. And that somehow proves your point? Which is what exactly? That you are willing to sacrifice the sovereign laws of our country because we should all get behind the President and his plan? Which of course is the only one that works because you said so.

Here's a constructive idea for you, only vote into office those candidates whose platform on illegal immigration is to enforce the laws we are supposed to be abiding by.

My plan would require us to first stop the illegal crossings and then deport the ones here so they can get in line behind everyone else who is already waiting for work visas. The jobs available can then be offered to legal immigrants and Americans. We can then work out temporary work visas for the remaining bulk of jobs still available. Anything else would cheapen our entire immigration policy.

But that is just me whining again, proving you accurate once more.

Suck it up brainy, if you c... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Suck it up brainy, if you can make a solid contribution, you should do so.

All I see from you is bitching and excuses.

Now J.R., I agree that a lot of the problem would be solved by just enforcing what's on the books - I said so in the initial post, for cryin' out loud.

But you know that's not happening, so what we have is a situation that needs fixing.

You said Job 1 is stopping the illegal crossings. Guess what, you agree with President Bush!

First, he has increased the budgets for the Border Patrol. Not just now, but ever since 2002. That's the first thing you do, get more supplies to the men doing the job.

Second, the fence/wall whatever you want to call it, has to be a multi-level approach. Not only because of logistical questions like terrain, counter-measures by mexican gangs and such (what? You thought M19 would not do anything?), but also because of the bureaucracy and the lack of coordination between agencies and jurisdictions. You might also think about the problem we have with courts hindering the process, and liberal townships trying to block federal projects. This "let's secure the borders" sounds great as a plan - even Democrats agree to it - but the problem is in the details.

You mentioned deporting the illegals. Also part of the President's plan. But it's not as if these guys are lining up at the DHS with "Illegal" tattooed on them, or that the places they go are cooperating with ICE or DHS. If you have been paying attention, you might note that ICE has ramped up efforts and has enjoyed good results, but the problem is still that in general, the illegals are able to blend in with ethnic communities, and unless they surface it's going to be expensive, difficult, and unpopular to pursue them. Again, you have to do more than just wave a rhetorical wand and say, "make it so".

You also need to figure out how we can protect legal businesses while catching the crooks, and the plans tossed out by morons like Tancredo amount to a lot more red tape and taxes on small businesses. Also, you'll have to figure out how we can get laws enforced in the face of courts which see "rights" in every shape and size to suit a judge's mood.

When I said Bush's plan was the best out there, I did not say we could not think about how to improve. But pretending that all we have to do is just pass new laws, or flip a switch somewhere is ridiculous. The mission is at every level of government, and the opposition includes crooked businessmen, race manipulators, and opportunists, and plays on the fears and confusion of millions of people who should be allowed a chance to become law-abiding taxpayers and to join the nation rather than be targeted.

As long as we have "Sanctua... (Below threshold)

As long as we have "Sanctuary Cities" nothing meaningful will come to pass. Some cities are acting in direct defiance of what laws we have now. They refuse to cooperate with federal authorities in cracking down on illegal workers and those who hire them.

DJ, I too, live in Houston.... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

DJ, I too, live in Houston. The illegal problem is justing getting worse and worse while our politicians do nothing. Our city government not only does nothing about it, it encourages it. I am against any plan until the border is secure. I am against it on principle alone. There is not ONE federal law I can break without having the full weight of the justice system come down on me if I were caught. If I used a false SS#, a felony. Someone elses SS# is identity theft, falsifying federal documents, another felony.

Our school systems are drowning in over crowded classrooms. Free breakfast and lunch programs. After school programs. All for illegals.

Hospital Systems are over run with illegals who go for regular aches and pains with no way of collecting the bad debt. A hospital I word for actually budgets 8m in bad debt per year. Nothing we can do.

This is a line in the sand issue for me. Lou Dobbs was asked if he thought we can deport 14m people. He answered that there is nothing the US can't do when we put our minds to it. I agree whole heartedly.

Corporations exploit the cheap labor. Democrats exploit their vote. Oh yeah. They are voting. The illegals have to go to the end of the line like they should have. ww

Oyster, it's abhorrent to m... (Below threshold)
brainy435:

Oyster, it's abhorrent to me that the federal government will fight tooth and nail to override state laws regarding drug use, but not for issues of national sovereignty.

So again, I am seeing lots ... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

So again, I am seeing lots of complaining, but if you don't support the President's plan, and can only lie about it and call him names ...

WHAT
IS
YOUR
ALTERNATIVE?


DJ - you want those "hard-w... (Below threshold)
Ray:

DJ - you want those "hard-working, good-hearted" folks a chance to become "law-abiding taxpayers"? Ah, no offense but what part of illegal don't you understand? Next you'll tell us that family values don't stop at the Rio Grande!

Neither do crooks, drug pushers, identity thieves, murderers, car-jackers, rapists, drunk drivers, do I need to go on?

By definition, every illegal alien is a criminal in the sense that in addition to being here illegally they also (more than likely) are working illegally and using fake or stolen social security numbers, identity, visas, driver licenses, etc. Why? It's par for the course in Mexico. It's how things are done there.

The brutal truth is if you have a Latino surname, you are allowed to violate several laws that American citizens would never be.

Again Ray, what is your ... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Again Ray, what is your solution?

My guess is, you don't have one, not one that goes beyond "Let's stop Illegal Immigration".

Anyone can whine. Is that all you can do?

GROW UP.

Operation Wetback II. ... (Below threshold)
bryanD:
DJ Drummond, making illegal... (Below threshold)
horse:

DJ Drummond, making illegals legal is a free pass, thus it is amnesty .

You saying it is a "lie" that the president wants to make the illegals legal and allow them to stay here, thus providing them a free pass and not deporting them, thus providing them amnesty, is really funny.

Plus, the people posting here have provided their alternatives. I am sorry you don't like what others are writing, but they are being sincere about what they believe and want. At this point you are sounding a little disingenuous, not to mention insulting.

Still nothing but gripes fr... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Still nothing but gripes from you, horse?

That's all you are, then.

Pathetic.

DJ, I hope you find happine... (Below threshold)
horse:

DJ, I hope you find happiness and peace.

DJ, So do you want... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

DJ,

So do you want to begin legalizing the illegal immigrants in the country now that have visible means of support (jobs)?

And use this proof of gainful employment as evidence of the intention to "do no harm"?

Or is that pinning you down too much?

...millions of peo... (Below threshold)
Anon Y. Mous:
...millions of people who should be allowed a chance to become law-abiding taxpayers and to join the nation rather than be targeted.

That right there is the basis of my disagreement with your position. They should not be allowed to get in front of the people who are trying to come here legally. If fact, the fact that they came here illegally should make it harder for them to get a legitimate spot here. When you reward bad behavior, you get more of it. And we definitely don't need more of that behavior.

So, what should we do? If first you eliminate all good solutions as unachievable, demanding that the solution must only be something that will make matters even worse, then choosing none of the above is the way to go.

So, it must be my turn. Let me hear about what a moron or liar I am.

Anon, I notice that you hav... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Anon, I notice that you have not bothered to offer any specific alternatives.

btw Anon, I said quite a while ago that legals always come first. Don't know if that makes you lazy or dishonest, but since I never said anything about giving illegals a cut inline, your slap is well off the mark.

bryanD, what I am trying to do is several things. First, get folks to realize that bumper sticker answers are useless here. Second, that President Bush has proposed several serious and reasonable plans. No, they're not perfect, but they are well-considered plans, developed by professionals in the relevant fields, and I have yet to hear a cogent reason why they should not be tried. Spittle-flecked screams that Bush is somehow 'trying to sell "Amnesty"' does not seriously address those plans. And third, no one, and I mean no one, has offered a set of specific, functional plans as an alternative. As today's set of comments abundantly shows.

Anon, I notice tha... (Below threshold)
Anon Y. Mous:
Anon, I notice that you have not bothered to offer any specific alternatives.

Well, some of what I would put forward has already been put forward by others, and been given rather short-shrift by you. But, what the hey, I'll bite.

1. First, we apply the first rule of holes: when you're in a hole, stop digging. We are getting buried (I know, my metaphor just got turned upside-down) by illegals. We have to stop the influx. That means the wall. Does that mean that we just throw up a wall, and then say our border is now secure? Of course not. The wall will have to be maintained and supplemented with electronic, human, canine, and what everelse will help. Yes, the bad guys will continue to try to beat our counter-measures. We should not lose heart and cry that we can't win. We can secure our border.

2. We must make it so difficult for those that are here illegally to function legally in our society, that they themselves decide that their best option is to leave. The most obvious place to start is the workplace. We need to get a national ID that works: a picture ID that's scannable like a credit card. When a business hires someone, the card is scanned, and then the federal government grants or denies the hiring, based on whether the applicant is legal to work here. Businesses that are caught cheating should pay severe consequences.

3. We must also make it impossible for illegals to interact with our government to obtain services. I'm talking about welfare offices, schools, voting registrars (!), and any non-emergency healthcare. National ID is a big part of the solution here, as well. Again, penalties for cheaters.

4. Undoubtedly, some who find themselves unable to function within the law (besides the one they broke to get here) will turn to crime. It shouldn't even be necessary to make this point, but, when someone comes in contact with law enforcement, if they're illegal, out they go. It's a national disgrace that many of our largest cities prevent their law enforcement officers from checking the immigration status of the law breakers they come in contact with.

btw Anon, I said quite a while ago that legals always come first. Don't know if that makes you lazy or dishonest, but since I never said anything about giving illegals a cut inline, your slap is well off the mark.

I have to question whether you are being deliberately deceitful, or are just plain ignorant. There is a limit on how many people we allow to immigrate into our country. Every day, people are turned down, because there are just too many for the slots that have been provided. None of these bills say that all these illegals go back to their country of origin and get in line behind all the would-be applicants who followed the law - staying in their own country and going through the application process. They instead would be allowed to have their path to legalization, regardless of our limits on legal immigration. That's quite an incentive to jump the line. But it worked for all those that did it before the last amnesty (that's what everyone called it then), that we got more of the same, in spades. If we again give the lawbreakers an advantage over where they would be had they obeyed the law all along, we again are sending the message that the rules are for saps.

Thank you, but no. I don't want more of the same.

DJ, hmmm...I've read a few ... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

DJ, hmmm...I've read a few people (and me) who suggest making it too "troublesome" and "risky" for people to employ undocumented workers. Humongous fines and federal charges will tend to clear the head, so to speak, of potential employers. Dry up the Demand.
It's not brain surgery, it's: if you're a 4'10'' non-English speaker, you're probably from a third world country due south of the USA, and until proven otherwise, illegal as hell.
Bush wants everyone to Play Dumb. That's BS!

Anon Y. Mous , WELL PUT!</p... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

Anon Y. Mous , WELL PUT!

WHAT ISYOU... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

WHAT
IS
YOUR
ALTERNATIVE?

I think alternatives have already been stated.

1. First, and foremost, CLOSE THE BORDERS, and get serious about it. Build more walls where needed, implement more border controls where walls cannot be placed.

2. Enforce and procecute employers who exploit this illegal labour workforce. We have the laws already on the books, time for the INS to start actually inspecting these workplaces. Round the illegals found, and kick their ass back over the Rio Grande. Heavily fine the employer for each illegal found. Criminal procecutions may follow.

3. Those two items above will do much to cut the flow, though it won't turn it off completely.

4. No amnesty, no worker programmes, no fasttracks to citizenship. If my parents can slog it for five years before getting their citizenship, then why should they get a break, especially if they have been using a stolen/false ID/SS card, which is a 4th degree felony to start with.


Most conservatives and libertarians recognise that one of Reagan's big failings was the blanket amnesty. It's the reason we balk at Bush's attempt at insanity (defined as doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.) Because, we know if we give 20 million amnesty now, in 20 years, we are going to have 40-50 million more!

My city in Ohio has changed much in the past 20 years, not only do we now have gangs such as the Crips and Bloods out on the west side, there has been a sharp rise in Latino gangs as well. In fact, the Latino population has risen sharply here in the past 10 years.

Anon, I notice that you ... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Anon, I notice that you have not bothered to offer any specific alternatives.

There have been plenty of suggestions posted here, just because you, DJ, don't like them, doesn't make them unworthy of discussion. I expect this kind of closedmindedness from Lee Ward et al, but not from you DJ. It's rather shocking. Paul has this same problem vis-a-vis New Orleans.

Yes, the bad guys will c... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Yes, the bad guys will continue to try to beat our counter-measures. We should not lose heart and cry that we can't win. We can secure our border.

If the Israelis...hell, if the SOVIETS can build a wall and keep people out (or in the case of the Soviets, in), surely we can build one.

Anon Y. Mous:I thi... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Anon Y. Mous:

I think you laid it out clear and concisely what needs to be done. Target the users of this illegal pool of labour, and much of the incentive goes away. And, yes, our local governments need to grow a pair and start sending any illegals caught in a crime (or for that matter, a traffic violation) right to the INS for deportation.

And yes, I take illegal immigration personally.

It's not brain surgery, ... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

It's not brain surgery, it's: if you're a 4'10'' non-English speaker, you're probably from a third world country due south of the USA, and until proven otherwise, illegal as hell.

Hell, I even agree with bryanD...whom I almost never do agree with. That's gotta mean something here.

Of course, I could snark at... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Of course, I could snark at bryanD and suggest that this is some sort of RACIAL PROFILING he is suggesting, which you know, we aren't supposed to do in this country.

(sorry, I just couldn't help it...)

It's not brain sur... (Below threshold)
Anon Y. Mous:
It's not brain surgery, it's: if you're a 4'10'' non-English speaker, you're probably from a third world country due south of the USA, and until proven otherwise, illegal as hell.

I suppose it's bad form after both bryanD and James Cloninger have stated their agreement with me, for me to turn around and disagree with them, but I must. I don't see where profiling comes into it. When law enforcement detains someone, the first thing they do is id them. If we had a national id, then law enforcement would have instant access to the subject's immigration status. It wouldn't matter if he/she appeared to be 4'10" from south of the border, or a 6'3" German looking individual. What matters is if they followed the rules and are here legally, or if they are illegal.

I'm personally skeptical of profiling in almost all circumstances, save a clear national security situation.

I suppose it's bad form ... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

I suppose it's bad form after both bryanD and James Cloninger have stated their agreement with me, for me to turn around and disagree with them, but I must. I don't see where profiling comes into it.

No problem to disagree, I'm not a troll, so I won't call you poopy-pants or anything like that.

DJ, the solutions have been... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

DJ, the solutions have been stated a number of times. I think you just don't like the solutions or you think they are unrealistic. Apparently, some of us disagree. There are far more benefits to US citizens in taking control of the problem quickly and maybe even harshly then to do nothing. If we come down hard on illegals and corporations that employ them, and I mean really hard, the problem will be resolved in short order and the future looks brighter. Deport, fine, jail, secure the border. Four points that can be achieved that will free up so much tax revenue, it will be like state and local governments won the lottery. ww

James, Anon, bumper-sticker... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

James, Anon, bumper-sticker statements that say nothing more than variations of "We Should Stop Illegals" are NOT alternatives.

You act as if you are the only people who want to stop the flow. You also sneer at the only plan on the books which is trying to do what you claim you want.

Sorry, but you are just not even trying. What you are doing, is insulting law enforcement and the people who actually do the job, by implying that they aren't trying. You're right up there with that jerk in the bleachers who thinks he knows more about what to do, than the pro pitcher on the mound.

I consider you useless, noisy, and stupid.

I consider you use... (Below threshold)
J.R.:
I consider you useless, noisy, and stupid

DJ, from someone who just last week was deleting comments and talking about honest discourse that was above the fray, your last statement is just beyond the pale. You are an ostrich with his head in the sand, refusing to entertain anything else but your ideas of how to fix this problem.

Tell me why you think it is OK to settle for a plan that didn't work 20 years ago? Do you understand that or is this just more noise? If you feel that Reagan's and Bush's plans are so similar and they are (or were) such experts on the problem, tell us all how Bush's approach will not result in even more illegal immigrants in this country?

Stop acting like a child.

No wildwillie, I like the "... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

No wildwillie, I like the "solutions" proposed, but I can't take them seriously, as they amount to "coaching" a pitcher by just telling him to get the batter out.

You mention 'coming down hard on illegals and corporations that employ them', for instance. Great.

Just how do you plan to do that, considering that many people have been trying to get that done for decades? Yes, that's a good goal, but it doesn't count as a proposal, because you haven't said how we should suddenly be able to do it now, when years of trying have not succeeded.

You say "deport, fine, jail, secure the border". Gee golly, why didn't anyone else think of that?

Wait a minute, they did. Once again you are tossing out something on the order of counseling a troubled student to 'study harder and get a good job'. COME ON!

Let me remind you about some of the real problems we face. Deportation sounds great, but have you noticed that Mexico is not exactly working with us on that count? It doesn't exactly do any good to deport someone who can come back the next day.

As for 'fine', who is going to deteremine the code of enforcement, and who receives those fines, and how do you figure to get past our wonderful court system to make it work? Fining companies which hire illegals is already the law, so you need to ask yourself, specifically, why it's not happening. Here's a hint - that problem is not at the federal level, and Congress is not going to be a help.

As for 'jail', did you mean local and county lock-ups, or did you mean federal facilities? Again, who's going to pay for it and how will the code be enforced? Hey, I have already said (though you ignored it) that I see the threat from criminals and predators released onto our streets, it's not as if I am at all worrried about the "rights" of people who broke the law just being here, but if you want to put them in jail, you're going to have to figure out how to get past the liberal judges and municipalities who want to give away the house to these people. I mean, they're already tring to sell us that terrorists have "rights", so what do you think they will say about "innocent" people who just happen to be "undocumented"?

And as for securing the border, again wonderful. I mentioned that the DHS under Bush is doing more on that score than ever happened before. Seems a bit chidish, though, that folks are whining about Bush not doing what they didn't make a deal about earlier. Especially since Bush is saying now - in 2007 - the same things he said in 2000. Lying about it and claiming he's the one who got distracted and forgot the problem is just ridiculous.

I agree that we need to finish that fence. By the way, what do you think the gerbil-brained activists are doing while we build that fence? What do you think the San-Fran-style judges are doing when they see us try to close that door? We're not talking about a backyard project and a trip to Home Depot, you know. Also, what do we do once the fence is done to surveil the perimeter and intercept incoming illegals. And oh yes, with a Jackass Congress, how will it get funded?

I understand your frustration with the problem. But trashing the President - pretty much the only guy on your side, when you really think about it - and ignoring the hard questions becauase they're tough, these are just plain bad ideas, and yes I've been rude here but the denial and refusal to face facts is blindingly stupid.

Bumper stickers went out with hippies, it's time to listen to the adults.

C'mon J.R., you can surely ... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

C'mon J.R., you can surely come up with something better than some version of "Let's stop Illegals" and calling that a plan.

And I explained that the Bush plan was developed by the DHS and Border Patrol. You know, the folks who do this thing as professionals? Instead of trying the 'gosh, it won't work, let's just bitch and moan and hope that helps' approach, why don't you get down to the details and really, seriously, look at the situation and our options.

Funny you want to pretend I'm the child here, when you're living in a fantasy world. What, are you gonna secure the borders with Smurfs?!?

Wrong kind of 'men in blue', boyo.

When you take a look at <a ... (Below threshold)
J.R.:

When you take a look at Bush's plan, you can see he hits the high points that most people who are sick of the illegals in this country consider necessary to curb this problem. Of course the devil is in the details:

A sub-point to number 4 on Bush's plan is this:

Illegal Immigrants Who Have Roots In Our Country And Want To Stay Should Have To Pay A Meaningful Penalty For Breaking The Law, Pay Their Taxes, Learn English, And Work In A Job For A Number Of Years. People who meet a reasonable number of conditions and pay a penalty of time and money should be able to apply for citizenship, but approval would not be automatic, and they will have to wait in line behind those who played by the rules and followed the law.

So where are they going to wait? Here in the U.S.? How is that punishment for violating our immigration laws? How is that fair to those still waiting for access in their home countries? Or does he intend to deport them all? For some reason I don't think that's the case. Anything short of deportation and getting in line back in their home country is a form of amnesty.

DJ, explain how this is a good thing? And who gets to stay with these illegal immigrants? Can they bring other members of their family with them to the U.S.?

What, are you gonna secu... (Below threshold)
J.R.:

What, are you gonna secure the borders with Smurfs?!?

Wow you're so clever! Another attempt at honest debate, hey DJ?

I understand that one th... (Below threshold)
Les Nessman:

I understand that one thing which has united extremists on both the Left and Right sides of the aisle, is their contempt for President Bush's attempts to reform Immigration and establish a semblance of Border Security.

Huh? Who on the Left has said anything of substance regarding Immigration?
Regarding immigration and border security, all the action is on the Right.

J.R., I'm still waiting for... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

J.R., I'm still waiting for your first specific alternative suggestion.

Better not hold my breath, I guess.

J.R., I'm still wa... (Below threshold)
J.R.:
J.R., I'm still waiting for your first specific alternative suggestion.

Better not hold my breath, I guess.

It all depends on how fast you can read, the suggestions are in my posts above. Of course, it seems you are the only one who gets to define alternative suggestion so maybe you just don't realize they are there.

You seem to like bolding things lately, I figured that might help you understand.

And please continue to disregard my legitimate questions of the plan you say is the best.

Nice try J.R., but heckling... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Nice try J.R., but heckling is not positive contribution.

And as I explaiend, the general goals you want to pursue, while worthy, do not count as actual suggestions, especially when you are being so general and vague.

"Win, Team!" Oh wow, I guess you should be coach, no one else could have come up with that, huh?

Please.

Oh well, at least I know your limits.

So still no legit... (Below threshold)
J.R.:

So still no legitimate answer to what we do with the illegals already here huh? Is that what you call a positive contribution, deliberately ignoring a relative question about the plan you say is the best?

Or was my question just more noise?

At least I'm trying to win, you are simply throwing in the towel because the task I decribe is too difficult.

Here is a differant suggest... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

Here is a differant suggestion:
1--Shout halt when you see them crossing the border.
2--If they don't halt--shoot their ass.
3--They will get the word very fast.

Oh yeah, jhow, shooting una... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Oh yeah, jhow, shooting unarmed minorities would never have a problem with our court system, right?

We could and should strictl... (Below threshold)
nogo postal:

We could and should strictly enforce current immigration laws...We could and should increase boarder security..We could and should put more pressure on Mexico to use their oil money and make their country one in which fewer people are forced to leave for economic survival..but we won't..
Mexico provides us with two things the U.S. cannot do without ...Oil..and Cheap Labor...

Until then it is all just political air as hot as Brownsville TX on a July afternoon...

Still lying I see, J.R.... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Still lying I see, J.R.

I offered specifics, you call it giving up.

And still you don't have any specifics. How like a Democrat you are, complaining about other ideas, offering nothing of substance yourself, but I have no doubt that if the problem is licked in your lifetime, you will rush to claim it was all due to your brilliant contributions.

nogo, we get oil from Mexic... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

nogo, we get oil from Mexico?

DJ: How troll-like you are ... (Below threshold)
J.R.:

DJ: How troll-like you are in the fact that you still will not address a relevant question about your best plan. And stop with the sh*t about lack of ideas, it is not a lack of an idea to enforce the laws on the books, it is not a lack of an idea to put people in place who will accomplish that goal.

but I have no doubt that if the problem is licked in your lifetime, you will rush to claim it was all due to your brilliant contributions.

What an odd statement considering that your only idea is to get behind the one Bush has already laid out. The plan so many here have problems with. The plan you say is so similar to one implemented 20 years ago that failed miserably.

Yes what you call specifics, I call giving up. Especially since you have failed to answer my simple question about bush's plan.

And seriously, why are you calling my statements lies? Please point out one lie. Stop being so damn arrogant.

And again, J.R. proves his ... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

And again, J.R. proves his inability to produce even one specific course of action.

Small wonder he's angry in this thread.

I'm going to start calling ... (Below threshold)
J.R.:

I'm going to start calling you DJ "Dodge" Drummond. For the simple reason that you won't answer a specific question about your plan.

And then won't point out any lies.

And then go on to determine that my suggestions are not a course of action.

And for what reason I have no idea other than you are just being an ass.

And again, J.R. shows his l... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

And again, J.R. shows his level of rhetorical acumen.

tsk, tsk ...

Sad, really.

Hey dodge, how old are you?... (Below threshold)
J.R.:

Hey dodge, how old are you? Is this really how you engage in debate? You shred my ideas as useless and fantasy, but then won't even respond to any points I bring up about yours.

Someone above has stated this already, but seriously the fact that you have publishing priveleges on the main page here at Wizbang is a shame.

I'm just killing time, J.R.... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

I'm just killing time, J.R. It's obvious by now you just want to play troll on my thread, so I am amusing myself seeing just how many posts you put up without once trying to actually contribute.

It's long been obvious you are only here to heckle, but you seem to be lacking in creativity there, as well.

Well, darn.

DJ, go ahead with your litt... (Below threshold)
J.R.:

DJ, go ahead with your little quips that you find oh so clever, but anyone is free to come and read these exchanges and determine who is acting more like the troll. Not only have you refused to engage in honest debate about both my suggestions and questions about yours, but you have reduced your comments to petty insults and tired analogies. You claim I'm here to heckle, but you're the one being juvenille. The choice is yours to raise the bar here.

Oil stuff...<a href=... (Below threshold)
nogo postal:
... and you think your comm... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

... and you think your comments will, what, impress the adults?

Just out of curiosity though, you're not making any sort of constructive suggestions, so how exactly are you lifting that bar?

Hmm.

Thanks nogo, to coin Johnny... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Thanks nogo, to coin Johnny Carson, 'I did not know that'.

C'mon...anyone here really ... (Below threshold)
nogo postal:

C'mon...anyone here really know we get most of our oil from Canada?
The information about..ah well..everything is out there...I find it ironic..yep the media is lazy when looking up stuff...but folks here show many of the same traits...

Sad. But it reminds me why... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Sad. But it reminds me why very few people can win on "Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader?"

Just out of curios... (Below threshold)
J.R.:
Just out of curiosity though, you're not making any sort of constructive suggestions, so how exactly are you lifting that bar?
Didn't say I was lifting, just that you are lowering it. All this and just 2 weeks ago you were crying like a baby and then acting all smug with your attempt at honest debate threads. Pity really, how quickly you dropped that idea.
Here's a letter I found tod... (Below threshold)
Ray:

Here's a letter I found today....enjoy. From vdare.com


Today's Letter: A Reader Explains What Immigration Has Done To His Town
From: Larry Thompson

I would like to invite El Presidente Jorge La Bushista to my little bitty pueblo in La Socialista Republica De Norte California so he could appreciate all these "jobs that Americans aren't doing" that Americans are not now doing because a lot of Americans have had to leave because wages have fallen through the floor and the cost to rent or buy a casa has gone through the roof due to overcrowding.

Our pueblo's employment has always been based on la touristas (skiing, fishing, hunting & sight seeing) and the government (BLM, USFS, City of L.A. DWP, CalTrans, City & County) so as you can imagine, we have a very limited economic base and hence a rather restricted financial demography. Approximately 99% of our county is "owned" by Federal Agencies or the City of Los Angeles so our property tax base is very limited. Manufacturing is basically non-existent so those jobs do not exist. Natural resource extraction/use is highly restricted so those jobs are very rare. Ranching/farming exists but has never paid well. The limited construction industry had always been the best hope for non-government employees to make a lower-middleclass living--that has changed though. Our kids used to be able to get jobs in all the fast food joints in order to buy their first car and learn the "work ethic". Both mom and dad had to work in our little bitty pueblo unless you were a government employee or a high end business owner.

To make a long story short.......things fell apart about 17 years ago when the illegal Mexicans "discovered" our pueblo. Our sheriffs department quit calling INS in 1992 because INS wouldn't come get them. Our little bitty court system has hired six fulltime Mexican interpreters. Our school districts are hiring Mexican aides. Our school districts have forced our teachers to learn Mexican or be fired. Half of classes are taught in Mexican. You can't get a "burger the way you want it" unless you speak Mexican. Construction jobs have gone from $22 per hour down to $12. Our one high school has a "no go area" for gringos. Methamphetamine has exploded. Heroin is being found. Gang graffiti is common. Parts of my town are no different than Tijuana. Yup, "family values don't stop at the Rio Grande". The La Bushista is insisting on making my little bitty town no different than the entirely violent, corrupt "family values" of mexico.

The funny thing J.R., is th... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

The funny thing J.R., is that I did ask at the very beginning for constructive input.

You chose the low road. I merely obliged you, once it became clear you would not budge from the gutter.

Ah, well, such is Life ...

Nice rant Ray, nothing about how to solve the problem I see, but that seems to be the theme song here, 'duck the issue'. Complete with that patented 'Blame the President' mantra.

Very fashionable.

DJ, you started taking the ... (Below threshold)
J.R.:

DJ, you started taking the low road when brainy called you on your ridiculous assumption of why conservatives don't like Bush's plan. Your assertion is absurd and instead of owning up to that fact, you said he was whiny and delusional. I guess you would call that the high road. No wonder the conversation devolved after that comment.

I tried on numerous occasions to show you what I would like done, but you dismiss that out of hand saying it is stupid and fantasy. Now you call where I reside the gutter. Amazing and again I'm the one talking the low road.

And I don't blame the President for illegal immigration, I just think his plan falls way short of solving the problem. Of course, we still don't know where the illegals here will wait while they get back in line. You don't seem to want to address that point.

DJ - with all due respect t... (Below threshold)
Ray:

DJ - with all due respect to your textual gymnastics, you know as well as most here what the solution is. It's mot complicated; the elites simply don't want to do it.

Build a double-layer fence, increase the Border Patrol by thousands and give them the authority to aggressively arrest and deport illegals, enforce workplace laws against illegal alien labor and finally make a "friendly" phone call to Mexico City and tell Calderon, while we are all for being good neighbors, we will not sit by and let Mexico "transplant" half their population into our country, the have their consulate constantly petition our cities and states to provide Spanish language to their "migrants" and not to enforce laws against illegal immigrants.

Now, has Jorge Bush done this? No, in fact he has this AG prosecute Border Patrol agents for protecting themselves and our territory and he pledged to his people (the Mexican people, that is) that he will work as hard as possible for immigration "reform" - which means allowing more 6th grade educated Mestizo into our country to undercut wages, steal identities, evade income tax, yadda, yadda, yadda. If we simply enforced the law, most illegals would self-deport.

Got it DJ?

Again Ray, you are plasteri... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Again Ray, you are plastering 'bumper sticker' answers, not really dealing with the problem.

And smearing the only guy in Washington who understands the issue and is trying to work on it, is not helpful.

I frankly am disappointed, but not surprised, by the lack of real submissions here. But that hardly means I have to let you slide on that stunt.

Oh yeah, jhow, shooting ... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Oh yeah, jhow, shooting unarmed minorities would never have a problem with our court system, right?

Well, if they were shot before they crossed the border:

They wouldn't be "minorities", but Mexican nationals crossing illegally. They aren't minorities across the border.

James, Anon, bumper-sticker statements that say nothing more than variations of "We Should Stop Illegals" are NOT alternatives.

Apparently you missed the alternatives, I'll repeat them:

1. First, and foremost, CLOSE THE BORDERS, and get serious about it. Build more walls where needed, implement more border controls where walls cannot be placed.


2. Enforce and procecute employers who exploit this illegal labour workforce. We have the laws already on the books, time for the INS to start actually inspecting these workplaces. Round the illegals found, and kick their ass back over the Rio Grande. Heavily fine the employer for each illegal found. Criminal procecutions may follow.

3. Those two items above will do much to cut the flow, though it won't turn it off completely.

4. No amnesty, no worker programmes, no fasttracks to citizenship. If my parents can slog it for five years before getting their citizenship, then why should they get a break, especially if they have been using a stolen/false ID/SS card, which is a 4th degree felony to start with.

These things are designed to cut the incentive to cross over here illegally. In fact, it pretty much goes with your number four point:

4. It can reasonably be said that a lot of the problem is not a need for new laws, nearly so much as it is a need for existing laws to be enforced, and enforced consistently. How would you persuade Congress to support improved enforcement initiatives?

How about the INS looking into the Congresspersons' own businesses, and seeing if they have anyone on their payrolls who shouldn't be there? How's that for persuasion?

So, what are your suggestions to the problem? Some of us are still waiting. What do you propose to help solve this problem?


I consider you useless, noisy, and stupid.

Childish, unhelpful, and ad hominem statements are not useful suggestions to the topic at hand, and only serve to hurt your otherwise valid questions you have posed. This is really no better than what Lee or some of the others on the left resort to.

Now, do you want to argue against my four points, or shall you dive into your Roget's for yet another set of homonyms?


I tried on numerous occa... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

I tried on numerous occasions to show you what I would like done, but you dismiss that out of hand saying it is stupid and fantasy. Now you call where I reside the gutter. Amazing and again I'm the one talking the low road.

I still don't know exactly what DJ's suggestion is...is it Amnesty? Worker Programme? I'm still waiting to hear his argument and solutions.


And I don't blame the President for illegal immigration, I just think his plan falls way short of solving the problem. Of course, we still don't know where the illegals here will wait while they get back in line. You don't seem to want to address that point.

And I don't think it's going to be addressed. Where exactly do these illegals go while they are waiting in line? Back home? Canada?

I'm with you here: If you aren't enforcing the current laws, VIGOUROUSLY, then NO PROGRAMME WILL WORK. Again, I point to Israel's example. Peace talks didn't work, consessions didn't work, more autonomy didn't stop the attacks. A big long friggin' fence? It worked. Cut down attacks and incurrsions by up to 95% where the wall was in place.

Yes, I know, the Mexicans aren't shelling RPG over at El Paso...at least, not yet.

James, repeating vague gene... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

James, repeating vague generalizations and misstating goals as a plan is not really going to impress anyone.

Well, I must admit you have probably impressed yourself. So, way to go I guess.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy