JustJess

Right. Because that would be such a good idea, killing harmless people for coming too close to the border. It's always a grand plan to just kill anyone who's too annoying or might cost a bit of money.

/end sarcasm
Really? Not one of your family members has ever broken any laws, least of all to get to the U.S.? You're 100% pure-blooded Native American, are you?

The whole point of protesting is to give a voice to what is not being voiced. It's freedom of speech. If your family were in danger of being ripped apart, you would be out there protesting too. If the "liberals" were in charge and handing out charity money hand over fist, you'd be protesting too. Voting is not the only way to voice your dissent.

1. What does that have to do with ANYTHING? My solution is NOT amnesty. It's reform. Some people should be kicked out, some should not. Either way, the laws need serious overhauling and rewriting. If we gave them a chance to be contributing citizens making a decent wage, they would be fine with paying taxes too.

2. THE LAW NEEDS TO BE CHANGED, THAT'S WHY THEY SHOULD RECEIVE AMNESTY. If you broke a law, and it was a poorly written/executed law, and you were caught and punished for it... but then they suddenly got a clue and revised that law... wouldn't you expect that you shouldn't be punished for it anymore?

__________________
My heart knows me better than I know myself, so I'm gonna let it do all the talkin'.

pan6467

Damn I find myself agreeing with Stevo and have Mojo saying he agrees 100% with me?????? While JustJess, Will and I are at odds?

Must be a full moon.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Mojo_PeiPei

I really don't get why people infer the Native Americans in the debate, as it has zero place or relevance. Not to threadjack, but people need to realize the Natives did live here, and then the honkies came and conquered and took the land. We made it our own, we established laws as a sovereign nation state, the Indians never did; so again to reiterate, one of the most perposterous arguements ever in this debate.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

boatin

The problem I have with illegal=illegal is that there are lots of example when the law and 'what's right' have been on opposite sides. I think that is a lazy argument, that doesn't bring much to the table to help solve the problem.

I also think that "love IS the answer", trite as that statement is. And that's my basic problem with landmines and the violent rhetoric. Doesn't really bring much to the table, either.

I think JustJess said it pretty well with points 1 & 2 at the end of that post 41. If the system is clearly broken, it's going to take a different order of thinking to solve it. That rarely happens without making some group unhappy. Shutting the border tight doesn't solve the problem on our side of it. So that just doesn't seem practical to me...

JustJess

^^ My point is that everyone was new at some point. Everyone.

__________________
My heart knows me better than I know myself, so I'm gonna let it do all the talkin'.

frogza

I am with Pan 100%. We can't change our legal system just because a group of people broke the law and don't want the natural consequences of their actions. The idea that we should declare amnesty is a prime example of a slippery slope. What other laws will become null and void? Where do we draw the line?

For a law to be fair it must apply equally to everyone and be within the grasp of everyone to obey it. That is the measure of a fair law. The fairness of a law is not defined by those who choose to break it, of course they'll think it's unfair.

How can we seriously say that since some of our ancestors may have come to this country illegally that we should continue to allow or even facilitate people to come in illegally. That amounts to the same argument I'd get in grade school of "everyone else is doing it"

My great great grandfather was a bank robber, he made a lot of money and never got caught. He even became a US Marshall in the Indian Territories. As Marshall he did a lot of good. He was only able to become a marshall because he owned land and cattle that he had purchased with stolen money. Perhaps I should become a bank robber. After all my great great grandfather did it. Or maybe we should declare amnesty to bank robbers, as long as they say that they are doing it to help their families.

The fact that people are crossing our borders in secrecy is evidence that they know they are breaking the law. That being the case, they know that if or when they are caught they will have to pay. Instead of having enough moral strength to admit they were wrong and accept the due punishment, they protest. They cry in the street. They get their freinds and family to threaten our politicians with their jobs if they don't save their miscreant associates.

If a law isn't being enforced you don't scrap the law, you reform the manner in which the law is enforced. Usually that means stronger deterants, and increased vigilance.

xepherys

1. Landmines work. They've worked in Europe for years. And in Korea as well. I HAVE notice the increasing beauracracy... and it's ALL caused by requests to reform and grant more rights to more people who are not citizens of our country. I think it should be concise, simple and clear. There is a process, Process A, that one can go through to ATTEMPT to gain citizenship to the United States of America. If you come over under any pretense other than a successful attempt at Process A (or the requisite work/study visa) then you are in violation of federal law and will be imprisoned and tried as an assailant on our country. Sound harsh? Good! It should be harsh to commit such violations against a country and it's people.

2. Protests used to work... a long long time ago. The Times they are 'a changin' I think the old addage goes. There were protests regarding reform here in Phoenix twice... both times they were during the business day, disrupted traffic and businesses. What a grand way to get people to side with you. Personally, I said fuck 'em before all of that bullshit. Fuck 'em double now!

3. Yes, they need changing. See point 1 above.

4. Hmmm, well that's below minimum wage. You know how immigrants can make sure they make minimum wage or greater? Come here legally, get a social security number and get a legit job. They may very well still be eligible for Medicare/Medicaid and even food stamps, but at least they'd be contributing to the system! Taxes, SS input plus additional from employer matches for required funds? THAT'S how the system is designed to work.

5. First of all, those businesses probably wouldn't want to hire legal workers because they cost more. Their desires do not trump law. Let's look at large corporation... I bet Enron was happier before anyone knew they were doing illegal shit with their books. Oops!


Yes, everyone was new, if Mexico wants to WAGE WAR against the United States in an attempt to take over political control of our country, I welcome such a nifty diversion. Alas, that is not the case. There are a few individuals that are sneaking into the country and sponging off the system. Comparing that to the native americans and european settlers/combatants is not even remotely similar.

xepherys

Also, the ancestors argument is ignorant, and frankly anti-American. It's a sentiment that is sadly shared by a large number of people. The ancestors argument is why Native Americans (I myself have Lacota blookd running through my veins) get free education, free hunting rights, and allowances that the rest of us are not. A few generations ago I can see it, but today, it's just as much bullshit as amnesty for illegal immigrants. I have English blood in me too, I may have had ancestors that owned black slaves. You know what? That's not MY fucking problem. I don't have black slaves. I DO have black friends. Why in the name of sanity should ANYONE be held accountable for the actions of their ancestors? Are we going to ostricize Germans because of Hitler? That's JUST as stupid as your argument.

As a clarification, I am not attacking you nor am I calling you, yourself, stupid. I am simply disagreeing vehemently with your logic.

Willravel

The laws in place serve no purpose, so they should be changed. Yes, it is currently illegal for a Mexican to cross the border without permission in order to not starve to death. It's a misdemeanor to shoot at any kind of game from a moving vehicle, unless the target is a whale in the state of California.

Some laws are dated, and need to be repaired or replaced. To say "I want them to leave because they're breaking the law!!!" is not actually stating a reason. If you want to make an argument, make it on it's merrits. Make the social argument. Make the economic argument. Even make a moral argument. Saying they should be gone because it's illegal is like saying the reason the sky is blue is because the sky is blue.

xepherys

Uhm... we have homeless people with no jobs whatsoever in the US and they manage to live. In fact, some are downright fat. If you have NO skills, NO job and NO ability to gain a job, you are NOT above eating food wherever you can get it. It is not my fault that their country sucks massive amounts of ass. There is a process to come here legally. If they cannot respect the laws of my country, I have no cause to respect them or their situation.

Willravel

A good friend of mine was homeless for 4 years. I would suggest that you have a friendship with or become homeless before you discuss it with any level of confidence. You disrespect every man, woman, and child who is homeless with your ascertion that it is easy to stay alive when you are homeless. Do you know why some homeless people are fat? McDonalds, Burgerking, Taco Bell. Take your pic. How often do you see homeless people in a supermarket versus how often you see them in fast food places? Add that with the lethargy of living a few feet from where you stand every day, and you're not living the life of good health.

Yes, Mexico doesn't heva the ecomeny to support their populace. Guess what? It's as much our fault as it is theirs. Everything from NAFTA to the vast wealth inequalities has brought the poor in Mexico to NEED the option of illegally crossing the border. So yes, it is your fault. It's my fault. It's the fault of every voting or nonvoting American for supporting politicians or not stopping politicians who are responsible.

I don't respect the law that makes immigration illegal, so should you respect me?

xepherys

I understabd exactly why they're fat. I understand that food that comes from refuse of the general public is not a fantastic way to survive. However, my point was, again, that there are OPTIONS, and that if you have NOTHING, you are not above such a feat to live. If I had absolutely nothing, I would not consider myself above dumpster diving for food. While it's a far cry from my typical Sunday trip to Whole Foods, circumstances are only what they are. I have neither respect, nor disrespect for people who are homeless. Some people choose the life. Some people have nothing else. It is what it is.

No, it's not my fault. It's not my fault that the Mexican economy is poor. It is not my fault that they illegally cross the border. That argument is like saying it's our fault that there is high crime in inner-city areas because of white opression of American black people. Bullshit! If a thug pops a gangsta, it's no more my fault than a Mexican hoping the border. I refuse to accept responsibility for the illegal actions of others. If you feel it's your duty to wallow in pity for those around you, feel free, but I cannot shoulder that particular fate of society.

Willravel

And it is because no one wants to take responsibility for the Mexican econemy that the problem may never be solved.

Mexicasns do not have the option of surviving on the kindness of strangers in the same way that the US homeless people sometimes can. The disposable income in the US is staggering, so it can sustain a small homeless population. Mexico is not the US. You cannot survive in Mexico the same way you survive in the US. Mexicco is more violent, the police aren't as friendly, the military is downright frightening, and there aren't rich people in SUVs driving their kids to soccer practice all the time. There are many places in Mexico that are comparable to hell. Places that would make the worst slums in the US seem like a gated community for millionairs.

BTW, I don't wallow in pity, I take action to help those who neeed help. Call it a savoir complex if you want, but I will die knowing that I helped hundreds, perhaps thousands of people in my life (or more, I don't really keep count). I'm not trying to hold that over you or anything, but if you want to know what goes through my head...I want to help those who need help. If helping them means inconveniencing a few people, so be it. I love my country, but the world comes first.

xepherys

It has nothing to do with WANTING to take responsibility. What have I, personally, done to disservice the Mexican people as a whole and cause them to illegally violate the borders of my country? Last I checked, nothing.

And I agree, helping people is a wonderful thing. However, I prefer to help people who deserve it, and criminals do not.

Willravel

Complacency can be a horrible crime. It's easy to say something isn't your problem until it ends up at your front door (or mowing your front yard). It is our problem not only because they are our neighbors and we can afford to help them, but becuase it's the right thing to do. Now we see what happens when an absurd war on drugs coupled with trade agreements that favor the ultra rich do in effecting a poor country. This is our problem. A truely democratic society is responsible for the actions of it's leaders. If we cannot control them, then they should be overthrown.
So because they break one law they don't deserve any help? Don't you think that's cruel? What if a jay walker was hit by a car? Wouldn't you call an abulance?

xepherys

a) Jay-walking is not illegal everywhere, and is certainly not a federal crime. I think comparing jaywalkers to border jumpers is like comparing the school bully to a murderer-rapist.

b) I agree that complacency is a terrible thing. However, much of the issues that damaged Mexico happened long before I could vote, or really had any clue what was going on. What I do, as my part of a democratic republic, is vote for the leaders I believe will do the best job. Bush has an all time low rating, and evenr Republicans are starting to talk out against him... I still don't see him being impeached.

The concept that we can change so much because we're in a democracy is a bit self-centered and ridiculous. The reality of it is that we have very little control over what our leaders do, and even less ability to "overthrow" them than our predecessors. It's all about the vote. Then there are those, like the Minutemen, who are actively fighting for what they believe. Kudos to them! In fact, I'd rather someone fight for what I disagree with than to do nothing at all.

The point is, I did not wage a war on drugs, and I did not vote for those that did. However, I cannot remove people from government or make those things better. I make decent money, but not enough to pull families out of poverty. I have my own family to worry about. And since I pay taxes that are supposed to help my fellow Americans in need (who I'd prefer to help BEFORE helping people from other countries*), I'd prefer it serve it's purpose rather than being bilked by people who are, again, illegally in the country.

* This is an interesting sidenote. We have homeless, poor, starving and undereducated people in the US, yet Americans donate MILLIONS of dollars each year to feed, cloth, shelter and educate those abroad. That's ass backwards. For a democratic country to start helping their neighbors, they should fix themselves first.

ubertuber

I'm really confused as to why this keeps coming up. Immigrants generally come here to work, not to be homeless on the streets. If they can jobs in a society that says it is illegal for them to work, why don't we value that work ethic and resourcefulness? But what does it have to do with allegedly fat homeless people who are scraping by off of scraps, charity, and government assistance?

__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

stevo

'tis true.

I don't feel guilty one bit for how life is in mexico, or any other country, nor should I. I live my life, pay my taxes, take care of my family and contribute to society. So I'll jsut reiterate, If illegals get amnsety I want amnesty too. Its only fair. If illegals are granted amnesty its because that whats deemed "fair" so how is it fair that they gat amnesty and I don't. fair is fair, see.

__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

xepherys

The point, my tuberific friend, is that we already have a bad state of affairs here in the US, by and large in metro cities, without MORE people coming into the country that will require social aid. When homeless people go to the hospital, they get treated, but they do not pay, we pay. When homeless people get drunk and disorderly (not that they all do), they go to jail and we pay (they aren't paying taxes to keep police employed, we are). These are just a couple of examples, and it's not just homeless people. We have hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people taking advantage of medicare/medicaid, many of whom have not put their fair share into the pot. We have a large number of social programs that you and I pay for that are used by people who have NOT paid for them. Adding more people into the mix that need to withdraw from those programs, but do not deposit into them means it hurts us, the legal, working, tax-paying citizens of this country. I'm really confused why some people don't understand that. We have ENOUGH problems at home... let's fix them before worrying about the poor people down the street. It's like this... say you live in Detroit and you're a good person. One day you come across a decent sum of money and want to help people. Do you invest the money back into Detroit, where your friends and family live, where you know the guy that owns the party store or gas station, or do you take the money and put it into immprovements in Atlanta? Most people would invest in their OWN community by choice. That's the point I'm trying to make. We're worried abouit reforms to help foreigners. What about reforms to help US?! Fuck the mexicans until social security is fixed. Screw them until we don't have massive poverty in our inner cities. To hell with offering spanish language courses at high schools until US literacy is the best in the world. *sigh* I just don't get it...

Why do we bend over backwards to "help" illegal immigrants? Why does Los Angeles have spanish-language classes? Have more ESL classes, and then they can graduate only by taking the normal englihs classes after a year or two. I had a friend who moved here from Germany in elementary school. He was too young to have really learned Enligh back in Germany. When they moved here, his father put him in a special school to TEACH him English, then in fourth grade he came to my school and learned just as well as everyone else. I highly doubt Mexicans are any less capable... they just don't WANT to do it for the most part. Well, fuck 'em then! That makes it even worse. Now people are paying higher taxes to support MORE teachers so that lazy fucking illegal people don't have to be bothered with learning English. Bullshit!

Again, I have nothing against Hispanics. Mexicans are great. They're welcome to come here legally, get a job, pay taxes and come over to my place for dinner. That's awesome. They are not, however, welcome to unlawfully invade my country, demand benefits and social services, and not contribute to the economic well being of my country. But, that's just me...

pan6467

Again I point to these 2 examples that the (for use of terminology only) Illegals advocates seem to ignore and not address.


So why are you advocates ignoring the facts?

Are you eager to watch these ILLEGALS abuse our system set aside for taxpayers so that the system is truly no longer there?

Are you so eager to see $1 BILLION of our tax dollars go to hospitals so that these ILLEGALS can get free medical while people like myself who work their asses off are forced to near bankruptcy?

Are you eager to see these scumbags sue and take up precious tax dollars and court time suing the government because we don't accomodate their language?

Where does it end?

I'm liberal, I'm a hippy John Lennon follower in most aspects but there has to come a time when for the good of my children and their progeny I have to take a stand and say, "ENOUGH, This is wrong and there is no excuse for it."

That time has come.

I see arguments that NAFTA has made the Mexican economy bad. I see people on here blaming the US for the Mexican economy.

Ignorance. Mexico has NEVER had a strong economy and has always been in turmoil of some sort. IT IS NOT OUR FAULT AND IT IS NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO ABSORB THEIR PEOPLES.

Hell, our own economy is on an extremely shaky ground...... we cannot absorb these ILLEGALS and expect our economy to stay healthy. What happens when these parasites destroy our economy? Is Mexico going to absorb us as illegals into their country? Is Mexico going to bend down and kiss our ass and wipe it for us as we shit on their system, like so many ILLEGALS do here to us?

I find it sad that some of my fellow liberals whom I agree with much more than I disagree with use opposite arguments to serve their purpose.

On one side they argue we are not responsible for other countries have no right to go in and take someone's sovereignty and are spending way too much on a war that we should never have gotten into.

Then in the next breath all those points get warped and turned the other way to support ILLEGALS. All of a sudden we ARE responsible for other countries, we MUST stabilize Mexico, the ILLEGALS HAVE RIGHTS to BILLIONS of our tax dollars and to destroy the system for those who were born here, work hard and pay taxes.... in fact we don't spend enough on them now.

Doesn't anyone else see the hypocrasy, insanity and just plain stupidity in any of this?

These ILLEGAL advocates seem to see nothing wrong with the ILLEGALS refusal to even attempt to assimilate into our culture. They seem to believe it is OUR responsibility to change our culture to suit these ILLEGALS.

My ancestors did not expect the US to bow down and change culture to suit them...... Rather they worked hard to assimilate into the American system and become American. Not German-American, not Irish-American, or Italian-American.... they became US American citizens and were proud to do so.

I have come to the conclusion that we have worked so hard not to offend anyone, to bend over backward to accomodate everyone and to try to help everyone but ourselves that we have all gone insane and destroyed our great country and what it once stood for.

There comes a time when you have to step away from helping others and look deep within to make sure that you haven't given up so much that you have nothing left.

It's like my job, when I first started I was eager to give and give and give to people..... but then I kept seeing the same people and they weren't progressing and they were looking for me to give more and when I couldn't because I just didn't have it to give they focussed on what I couldn't give them and not on what I had given.

So they complained that I didn't care and whatever. It got to the point I nearly burnt out. But instead I realized...... I can give all I can but in the end I have to maintain what is best for me and stay true to myself.

So I give all I can but I no longer give to the point of my sanity, values and morals. I suggest some others look deep within themselves and find out why they feel the need to give away more than they have to appease people committing ILLEGAL acts and using our system to suit what they want as they take and take but refuse to put anything back into it.

It's like the rich in this country, they are the opposite. They take and take and rape the system and the workers and put as little as possible back into the system. And complain the whole time.

Surely we can find a common area where ALL can survive together and there is enough for everyone.

Then and only then can we even think about giving to ILLEGALS and work to absorb them, but first and foremost we must clean and fix our own house before we do.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

sprocket

I dont post often and usually dont agree with most things you say pan, but that last post was excellent!

__________________
Remember, wherever you go... there you are.

connyosis

I read this:

And then your signature:
It makes my head spin, but maybe it's just me...

__________________
If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby.

pan6467

I can see why. But in all honesty until we fix our country and make it healthy enough to absorb these ILLEGALS, we are doing no one any good. The people coming, our progeny or ourselves.

Right now our economic system is broken and unless we fix it the flood of ILLEGALS will in time add to the total destruction of the system we have had that is so great.

How can YOU and my fellow Dems. sit there and argue that "ILLEGALS" are good for the system that in the next breath you say is near colapse????

It's hypocrasy and foolishness and loses many many voters and the people needed to support and elect the party.

Lennon while he believed in the people also believed that people should feed the system and make it better. ILLEGAL immigration no matter how you try to make it sound and look is still ILLEGAL and is destroying the system not adding to it.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

pan6467

BTW nice change of subject and avoidance of the topic at hand.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

connyosis

No change of the subject, just an observation. For the most part I agree with what you say, things need to change. I just reacted at your claim to not have any problems with killing people trying to get into your country. I hope you're not serious about that because if you are it truly sickens me.

__________________
If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby.

xepherys

I think we should have a shoot to kill policy on the border. I'm not FOR shooting people, but if it's known that that is our policy, they've taken that chance into their own hands. *shrug*

roachboy

i had written a post that went point by point through some of the arguments above but i deleted itmostly because i decided it was dignifying with a serious response arguments that do not merit one. putting landmines along the border to aim folk who try to cross without---well what, really? you think landmines discriminate between folk who are properly documented and those who arent? you think landmines ask questions before they take off someone's legs or worse? shoot to kill on the border? in what context can you even propose this kind of thing, much less take it seriously?

truly vile stuff, folks.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Gatorade Frost

If you have a very clearly marked "No Man's Land" then that would be in the context that it's said. You make very clear places for en trances and exits out of the country and having one go off wouldn't be a mistake. When you have a place clearly marked that there are land mines, well, unless you're really stupid properly documented immigrants wouldn't be walking through then, and illegals won't have the ability to walk across on pain of death. They would know better.

Of course, I think the idea is lunacy and would never personally condone it, but in some sense it's not a completely insane idea.

__________________
I got in a fight one time with a really big guy, and he said, "I'm going to mop the floor with your face." I said, "You'll be sorry." He said, "Oh, yeah? Why?" I said, "Well, you won't be able to get into the corners very well."
Emo Philips

xepherys

Not vile at all... no moreso than owning a pistol for protecting your home. First of all, why would LEGAL immigrants be crossing in the wilderness over fences and through minefields? Nobody said to lay mine down at the patrolled roadways between the countries. Mines shouldn't discriminate... they're there to prevent people from BEING in that area. If someone wants to risk it, that's a choice they make.

Shoot to kill on the border makes perfect sense. Other countries have done in since they came into existance. And doing so is not counter the American beliefs of basis. I don't understand how this can be a bad thing. What if it were to protect us from terrorists? If it would be okay then, then you are simply splitting hairs. If you still feel it's bad, than you are too liberal for my taste.

People who belong here have a legal and safe means by which to get here. Otherwise, a big "NO TRESPASSING" sign isn't going to cut it with those who come here unlawfully. Is it not okay to "shoot to kill" around the perimeter of a military installation? Again, if you feel this IS okay, then you should lay out your standards for when it is/is not okay. If you do NOT feel this is acceptable, well... then I don't understand you at all...

pan6467

Is it ok to have ILLEGALS come here and kill our tax-paying citizens and their families or steal from them, only to have their only punishment a deportation back to Mexico, where they cross the border again and are back within months??????

It's ok for them to kill us and to get off with nothing and have our own people cry about how badly we treat them. Yet when anyone points out what the reality is that these people are criminals and should be treated as such, those people are ignored.

And again, I notice my friends to the left have totally ignored any argument I have given them.

Amazing.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

stevo

I noticed it right away, but I've been noticing that aspect of the left for years.

__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

pan6467

The Right on this board is just as guilty in other areas..... but I refuse to let the Left slide and not face legitimate points on this issue. I don't allow the Right to.

If this were any other issue, say, against the Iraq War for instance, and I brought up good valid debateable points and the Right ignored them, these same people would be using that as proof that the Right didn't have a leg to stand on and were scared to debate the topic.

This is a place where the Left faces that problem. They are not in the majority, they refuse to debate good valid points and they twist arguments to suit their need (as shown previously, the arguments they use against the war, are the same they use FOR illegal immigration).

It's not new and both sides do it hoping the vast majority of people won't catch on. And the big problem is they are right, the majority of their party blindly follows what their leaders say, regardless of what the truth and common sense dictates.

Hmmmm..... think that would make a good topic.

// End threadjack as I await any rebuttals to the topic of why ILLEGALS should be allowed into this country.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

pan6467

It's a valid observation.

I am not truly an advocate of ANY form of murder or killing, but something needs to be done to stop this insane flow of ILLEGALS.

"Shoot to kill" would be a very good deterrent and a short term solution.

Changing immigration laws to suit these people, again, just a short term deterrent.

The ONLY true solution is to get the Mexican government responsive to it's peoples. But given the history of Mexico I don't see that happening.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

roachboy

pan: there are a few reasons why i have difficulty taking your positions seriously except insofar as it reflects your immediate opinion (that is your arguments bear on your particular situation in a way that is not really political, in that it is not and cannot be generalized without thinking more about how you link your opinion to some larger context)....

1. you do not seem to have considered the matter of definition. you are complaining about a population that seems to me parts of migrant labor pools---which are basically diferent from immigration---- in that reverse migration--that is, going back--is much more central to undocumented pools [so far as the data have seen can determine]--you could even wonder if these folk are "immigrants" at all--or whether there is some ideological function to classifying them in this manner--you know, just as there is an obvious ideological aspect to calling them ILLEGAL immigrants as opposed to, say, undocumented workers--which is both more accurate and less inflammatory. but if you referred to them as undocumented workers, the rest of your association would fall apart, so no wonder you prefer the more incorrect and inflammatory term.

2. your posts do not take the role of empoyers in the states into account.
the employers create the pool, pan.
folk come here to work.
migrant workers come here to work.
most send money back to where they come from, come here for a limited period and plan to return--or would, unless idiotic plans like "shoot to kill" at the border operates to trap the populations here that you complain about. (so much for the reasonableness of that goofball scheme.) anyway, the driver of these pools--their scope and density of activity---is employers in the states.
it is not the fact that people come into these pools--it is that these pools are viable sources of cheap, unorganized labor for firms--which operate in a political context that sanctions all such actions (e.g. the creation of labor markets for undocumented workers) implicitly under the rubric of a "rational" quest for increased profit.

in a general sense, you have to link the pull of these labor markets in the states to another broader context, which is the--um---uneven development north/south that shapes the reality of globalizing capitalism. but you said earlier--along with stevo no less--that you do not care about the economies of other places. to my mind that means you do not care about even trying to think about this topic--you prefer to vent. feel free--but dont expect folk who disagree with you to waste their time trying to take seriously the way in which you do it.

3. if you incorporate the simple fact of the matter--that migrant labor pools exist because firms create the demand for the workers--then extending the problems, such as they are, that are generated by the existence of these pools into the logic of old-school captialist-style class warfare is pretty easy.

and bvy refusing to think in this direction, you fall straight into one of the oldest types of class warfare--setting one group of exploited folk against another. the americans love that shit--think reconstruction. but we are not alone--you have a truly sorry history of the diversion of petit bourgeois resentment into truly foul political actions in western europe--think the entire history of lovely radical nationalist movements--to avoid being explicitly inflammatory- look into poujadisme in france, or the fron national, or the politics of heider in austria, the bnp in the uk....you'll see.

since you exclude critical factors from consideration, your views end up tracking into very strange ground, pan---i have other stuff to do so will defer going into this--but if you look at the front national or bnp, you'll get a fair idea of what i think of this politics you are working out for yourself.

the abbreviated version: i do not find the way in which you, and your temporary (far-right) colleagues above frame the question of migrant workers, documented or otherwise, to even be coherent. so you should not be surprised that there is no real interest in engaging you across your frame of reference. you act as though you have thought out and resolved questions before you begin to write stuff that so far as i can tell you havent even posed logically. then you get snippy that folk do not respond directly to your "points"--which are wholly knit into a framework that is in itself not coherent, so far as i am concerned.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

xepherys

roachboy, are you serious?

It's more accurate? Hmm, yes, many of them DO work, however the lack of "documentation" proves their illegal status. That "documentation" they do not have is a social security card or a work visa, the two things that allow people to LEGALLY work in the United States. Also, they are here without proper doucments (stamped passports) and they are from another sovereign country, which makes them immigrants who are not here legally (when you take a business trip, you still get immigration/emigration stamps in your passport... those words have rather specific meanings). So how is illegal immigrant not accurate even by a smidge? Also, they don't ALL work. So, no, "undomuneted worker" is NOT more accurate. And as for inflamatory, well... that's splitting hairs.

Your point #2 does not hold up either. First of all, in our country consumers create work pools, not employers. If people didn't eat oranges and didn't drink orange juice, the orange farmers would have no need for additional, cheap labor. People, however, DO drink OJ and eat oranges and oragne flavored things. So citrus farmers need more people to pick fruits out of trees. They CHOOSE to illegally employ "undocumented workers of an unlawful immigration status". They CHOOSE to pay them cash under the table. They CHOOSE to not pay taxes, social security/FICA and the like on those workers pay. The employers CHOOSE to break the law and so do the illegal workers. Also, no, most do NOT "plan to return". Somehow they make a few thousand dollars, send it home to their families over MANY months and then go home to blow through it for a while and then come back in a few years? Obviously you've never lived in the southwest. They come here to make money, send some back and then pay coyotes to sneak relatives across the border. It happens every day and every night. Where do you get your information from? Most of it, so far in this thread, has been bad or false.

#3... "old-school capitalist-style class warfare"... Hmmm, well yes, there's nothing really "old school" about the capitalist class system we have in the US. It still exists as strongly today as it did 200 years ago. It dones't prevent these "work pools" from being ILLEGAL. If businesses are not punished as well, we will still have problems. Several people, including myself, have suggested STEEP punishments for companies who hire "undocumented workers of an illegal nature". I'm sorry, perhaps it'd be even less inflamatory if we called them "Undocumented Americans". Yes, that sounds much more liberal and supportive. Even though they aren't Americans. But, pishaw... that's just a small issue.

At any rate, even though pan and I are not usually on the same side of things, I have to say that he's more or less dead on. Your arguments don't really have any bearing on reality. While they are, to some degree TRUE (work pools exist, capitalism creates classes, et cetera), they are useless in the context of this thread. I think you're grasping at straw.

xepherys

Also...

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/04/20/im...ids/index.html

It's not just mexicans, it's ALL illegal workers. Sadly, around here illegal immigrant = mexican, but that's surely not the case throughout the country, and they ALL need to be treated the same... as ILLEGALS!

roachboy

xephyrx: you were the one proposing shooting people at the border for trying to cross. so that really positions you as an interlocutor in this conversation. worse, you seem to confuse killing people who try to get work in the states without documentation with a reasonable response to a problem that you appear to not understand.

you provide no compelling argument against my offering a counter terminology. you dont even see a choice in the terminology. all i said was that it is false to call these folk immigrants, in the main, because of the overwhelming role of reverse migration.
you offer no information to counter the claim, preferring instead to wave your hands and act as though reality is dispelled thereby. whatever. and then, after you do not address the point, you wander away into the realm of false analogy.

this kind of thinking may persuade others who share your politics--but if you seriously want to persuade folk who are not in accord with how you frame this question, you really should work a little harder logic and information-wise.

the bypassing of employers in your next point is simply bizarre. behind it seems to lurk the kind of reductive-to-the-point-of-surrealism econ 101 models that make of firms simply agents that respond to consumer demand.
there is a long long list of problems with this kind of reductio-ad-absurdum modelling of economic activity. starting in on them would constitute a threadjack, i think.

anyway, you effectively concede as much yourself, when you move (apparently unmotivated logically, but perhaps as a function of the weakness of your general position) to a series of points that target firms and their actions directly.

but let's say, hypothetically, that there is something to your second point. the consequence of it would be to organize consumer boycotts, to organize protest actions that would be aimed at forcing firms to change their actions--or, if your politics really do prevent you from imagining that capital can ne anything other than totally rational--changing demand patterns. either way, nothing in what you say functions to support your fundamentally repellent views on migrant/undocumented workers themselves. and there is nothing AT ALL in your arguments that would get you even close to a legitimation for a campaign of state-sanctioned massacre on the borders.

third: when i said old school, you misunderstood. but whatever.

it is the logic of your own blinkered view on this matter that forces you to make a fetish of tyhe fact of your own citizenship, to move from there to constructing some kind of hallucinated community that you are afraid is being swamped by a wave of Others from far away. that you are willing to fantasize about murder on the basis of such flimsy arguments is kind of creepy.

your position is different from pan's in that i think pan has trouble embracing the implications of his position, whereas you are right there, greeting all with open arms.

btw: a side question---if you sell you labor power for a wage, you are interchangeable with anyone else who also sells their labor power for a wage. your citizenship is no magic talisman that changes that. and you would have to be an idiot to imagine that the holders of capital would care about your legal status unless they were forced to. and they arent being forced to. and nothing about politics like yours would force them to. your solution appears to be a kind of blind paranoid violence that could perhaps be differentiated from a race war or a war between linguuistic communities in your world, but in mine, the distinction is hard to find.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

pan6467

Roach.... we agree far more than we disagree on issues, yet you are willing to destroy any political bonding, alliance and friendship by attacking me?

SO I obviously cannot come up with my OWN opinions. I must be following someone else's lead?

That is laughable, I NEVER follow anyone else's opinion. I make my own and then I agree or disagree and if it is important enough to me, I read info, I study and if need be I'll change my opinion, but I educate myself very well before I "just" take a stand.

I see, so when I attack these supposed new friends of mine "the far right" whom, most of the time I have attacked their beliefs just as heavily, you back me and support me, but if I think for myself and have a differing view on an issue, then I am an idiot not worthy of debate?

Hmmmmm........

Is it any wonder the Dem party is done? If they can't win in Ohio or Federally this year and in '08 it's time they disband. And the attitude you imply, the elitism the snobbery, makes me abhor the political party I love.

This is supposed to be the party that accepts opposing views, can debate without relying on the "you're an idiot, so I'm ignoring you" games. I am saddened that 1 issue can show what a person truly thinks of another.

This is supposed to be a party where unlike the GOP we are allowed to have differing views on issues and still accept each other. Yet, by your post I see that is not truly the case.

But as Billy Joel sang in "SAY GOODBYE TO HOLLYWOOD" and it rings so true:


As far as the job pools, YES, the employers should be highly punished for hiring ILLEGALS, for the employers (like Yoder's who rehired the murderers) are just as guilty and should be tried for the crimes the ILLEGALS make. They should also be forced to pay the government and the hospital the bills these people run up while here.

You say I'm doing the class warfare thing?

Ummmmmm The owners and CEO's appreciate your views of believing that ILLEGALS should be here. It keeps their payrolls down so they have more profit.

But keep telling me, I'm the one involved in the prejudicial class warfare.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

ubertuber

Guys, let's remember that it's better if discussion brings us together. What I mean is that we're not on teams, and our beliefs are defined by far more than who we attack.

__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

Bill O'Rights

Pan...settle down, man. Roach didn't "attack" you. He has a differing opinion is all. Now you know how I feel when I find myself in agreement with Ustwo.
With very few exceptions, no one is totally "liberal", or totally "conservative". You have found an issue that, because of you own personal life experiences, has you sounding a little...well...conservative. Nothing wrong with that. Just don't expect your "friends" to come along for this ride. Maybe they'll catch the next bus, or the one after that...who knows. Just remember...all of the buses go to the same depot. Cool?

__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony

"Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus

It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.