Pelosi: Deporting Illegal Immigrants 'Just Wrong'

[nehalem256]

And here we go again with blaming the illegals for everything conceivably wrong with the whole situation as we casually ignore the root cause of the problem: "legal" lawbreakers on our side of the border who knowingly hire these illegals for personal exploitative fun and profit.

Obviously, there is a "need" for illegals in our country. Those businesses who hire them are willing to break "the law of the land" to make just that statement, and our politicians merrily go along with it, just the same as they go along with having Reagan granting them amnesty and Bush clearly expressing the he so passionately wanted the very same thing.

I could argue both ways about Pelosi's remarks and be right about it from a narrowly defined perspective. However, there's no way around the idea that those millions of illegals are here, they're here to stay and deporting them en masse is about as logical as building our own special version of the Berlin Wall to keep those "undesirables" out. Especially so when those with the most influence in our halls of Congress and the White House want to keep the flow of dirt cheap willfully compliant and exploitable illegals going at full throttle.

When taking a step back and looking at the "illegal labor" situation from a wider perspective, what pops out is the fact that on the one hand our business folk have easy access to labor at below poverty level wages, AND have the luxury of not having to worry about these illegals forming unions to demand better pay and benefits.

Now who in their right mind would want to disrupt that kind of "dream come true"?

Surely not those uber rich folk who own and operate the Repub Party.

So it is the responsibility of private businesses to enforce immigration law; not you know actual law enforcement?

 

[fskimospy]

Good thing 18th Century America is exactly the same as 21st century America!

You're right, because societies change over time we should learn nothing from history.

Also, I should point out that Ben Franklin thought that Swedes and Russians were "swarthy". He is perhaps not the guy I would run to for quotes on race and immigration issues.

Maybe perception of other races' characteristics is a social construct. Considering your history on here I'm not at all interested in what you consider a reputable source. Remember, you're irrational.

 

[fskimospy]

Mexico / Central America and Germany are two totally different situations.

From Franklins time until today, Germany has unified and become a world leader, while Mexico is still riddled with violence.

So it's almost like countries with a history of violence can change. Gee, I wonder if that's applicable to our discussion.

Armed with this knowledge of the obvious wrongness in the past of exactly the nativist position today, what would you revise about your opinion?

 

[nehalem256]

You're right, because societies change over time we should learn nothing from history.

So you see no difference between 18th Century America and 21st Century America in terms of why we may no longer want to allow low skill immigrants in?

Maybe perception of other races' characteristics is a social construct. Considering your history on here I'm not at all interested in what you consider a reputable source. Remember, you're irrational.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/swarthy

Swarthy is not a social construct. Swedes and Russians are not swarthy; if you think they are of dark complexion you are wrong.

 

[Texashiker]

So it's almost like countries with a history of violence can change. Gee, I wonder if that's applicable to our discussion.

Armed with this knowledge of the obvious wrongness in the past of exactly the nativist position today, what would you revise about your opinion?

How long should we give Mexico to fix its social and economic situation before we start turning away refugees?

Mexico and parts of central America have been in turmoil since Cortes landed. Since 1485 it has been one group slaughtering another. Only parts of Africa and the middle east have such a long history of violence.

Have you ever read A Short Account of the Destruction of the Indies? Maybe you should.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Short_Account_of_the_Destruction_of_the_Indies

 

[fskimospy]

So you see no difference between 18th Century America and 21st Century America in terms of why we may no longer want to allow low skill immigrants in?

See my previous reply.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/swarthy

Swarthy is not a social construct. Swedes and Russians are not swarthy; if you think they are of dark complexion you are wrong.

You're a moron; all language is socially constructed. Words have no meaning except for that which we as a society give them.

What a word specifically meant in the context of 18th century America may, shockingly enough, not be the same as is present in the free dictionary on the internet of 2013.

 

[fskimospy]

How long should we give Mexico to fix its social and economic situation before we start turning away refugees?

Mexico and parts of central America have been in turmoil since Cortes landed. Since 1485 it has been one group slaughtering another. Only parts of Africa and the middle east have such a long history of violence.

Have you ever read A Short Account of the Destruction of the Indies? Maybe you should.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Short_Account_of_the_Destruction_of_the_Indies

The value of immigrants to US society is not dependent on how their home country is doing. German immigrants did not become a positive force in the US because their country eventually recovered.

 

[nehalem256]

See my previous reply.

So you are refusing to take into account changing circumstance because it is inconvenient for your argument.

 

[fskimospy]

So you are refusing to take into account changing circumstance because it is inconvenient for your argument.

Nope. See two replies ago.

BTW, nice way of editing out the fact that you didn't understand that language is a social construction.

 

[Texashiker]

The value of immigrants to US society is not dependent on how their home country is doing. German immigrants did not become a positive force in the US because their country eventually recovered.

It is selective immigration, and not free-for-all immigration that can benefit our society.

 

[bradly1101]

What happens when you grant amnesty to people who are not interested in integration?

If illegals were interested in integration, box labels would be in english, and not english and spanish.

White man had no desire to integrate when he took this land, why do we hold others to a higher standard?

I notice in the Japanese market (where they have the best fish), most of the packaging is in Japanese. Does that mean they don't want to integrate?

Multi-language packaging is just marketing, not a declaration of segregation.

 

[Spungo]

These illegals ARE "destroying" the Natives. They do not share our values, our language, or our culture. They retain and bring with them their home. In return our home becomes more like theirs every day.

Which means widespread abject poverty and violence.

There are simply too many to assimilate, especially when they concentrate into specific areas that become 100% foreign.

I would be 100% in favor of a completely open border if we didn't have extreme socialism in this country. We can have one or the other but not both. We can't have tens of millions of people joining the system then costing us billions of dollars for education and medical care. I think removing public education is a terrible idea, so the solution is to keep a tight border and deport the people who enter illegally. USA is still a great place to live compared to most of the world, so we can be selective. We can take in people who can weld or do engineering. We don't need more people mowing lawns.

You should see how tight Canada's immigration is. Even if you're a rich American with a good job, they might not let you into the country if you have a DUI on your record. They must look at us and think we are retarded. We let people stay in the country when we don't even know what their real name is.

 

[D-Man]

I am not a gun control advocate. The second amendment is the law. If I were the sheriff I would either resign or disobey and take my case to the courts. I have no opinion of the merits. Not my kind of issue. I also have no opinion of illegal immigration. It is way too complex for me to say what to do. What I do know is that politicians of both parties seem to be paralyzed on the issue. What I do know is that conservative brains vary on the issue with some in the extreme. Conservatives favor low effort thinking which isn't up the task here. Just imagine if you had to answer the questions I asked. You'd probably get a headache.

And this from the lowest effort thinker on the board. We need to pass another bill to see what is in it. Who knows maybe a new law would require you to house 4 Illegals in you basement 4 conservatives that is. Talk about having your brain rattled more than it is scary.
Maybe a joint effort would work on the issue but not for you. Your continuous babel about Conservatives is plain stupid. Thanks for your post I just got my fill of stupid for the week.

 

[Fern]

-snip-
Gee. Our good friend Ben kind of whiffed on that one, huh. Makes you wonder what the nativists are whiffing on now.

I think it important to remember that the British hired/used many Germans (Hessians) in their fight against us during the revolutionary war. I think it quite likely there were lingering 'hard feelings'.

A large group of non-English peoples was in a much different context then. Franklin and others were on the tail end of a history that included 'foreign' groups (French, Spanish, Dutch) laying claim to portions of the USA. I think it possible that tens of thousands of non-English speaking aggregating in one area may raise concerns. We were a small and very young country, who's to say another group couldn't break off and claim their own country and possibly with their home country's support.

Fern

 

[fskimospy]

I think it important to remember that the British hired/used many Germans (Hessians) in their fight against us during the revolutionary war. I think it quite likely there were lingering 'hard feelings'.

The quotes precede the Revolutionary War.

A large group of non-English peoples was in a much different context then. Franklin and others were on the tail end of a history that included 'foreign' groups (French, Spanish, Dutch) laying claim to portions of the USA. I think it possible that tens of thousands of non-English speaking aggregating in one area may raise concerns. We were a small and very young country, who's to say another group couldn't break off and claim their own country and possibly with their home country's support.

Fern

I agree that groups of immigrants in that day were more threatening in that way than they are now. That makes the case for such thinking being nonsense now even stronger, however.

 

[Fern]

-snip-
I agree that groups of immigrants in that day were more threatening in that way than they are now. That makes the case for such thinking being nonsense now even stronger, however.

Different kind of threat now.

Fern

 

[Texashiker]

That makes the case for such thinking being nonsense now even stronger, however.

Something you liberals need to understand, illegals from central america are not interested in integration. They wish to reclaim the land the traitor Santa Anna signed over during his surrender.

Germans, Dutch, Irish,,, nobody else can make the same claim as Mexico. at one time they owned large areas of the United States. And if it was not for the backstabbing traitor Santa Anna, that land would still belong to Mexico.

How are they going to retake the land? By amnesty and voting blocks.

Fighting wars is useless in a republic and a democracy. All you have to do is one more vote than the other side.

 

[PokerGuy]

Here's Franklin's quotes for context. It is basically word for word the same arguments that nativists in the US make today.





Gee. Our good friend Ben kind of whiffed on that one, huh. Makes you wonder what the nativists are whiffing on now.

Except that the situation with Germans is nothing like the situation we're seeing now. There wasn't a land border with Germany to allow millions of them to simply jump over the border and invade. With millions invading, there is no reason to assimilate, they are simply taking over and in many areas have already done so. They don't seek to better themselves by adopting the culture of the US, they seek to turn the US into the failed state they left behind.

That's all irrelevant to the discussion though. The point is that scum like Pelosi want us to ignore the laws when she doesn't find them politically convenient. And to think that not only is a scumbag like her in congress, she's actually tabbed as a "leader" by her fellow idiot democrats.

 

[Texashiker]

That's all irrelevant to the discussion though. The point is that scum like Pelosi want us to ignore the laws when she doesn't find them politically convenient. And to think that not only is a scumbag like her in congress, she's actually tabbed as a "leader" by her fellow idiot democrats.

Isn't ignoring laws a reoccurring pattern with socialist democrats?

 

[fskimospy]

Except that the situation with Germans is nothing like the situation we're seeing now. There wasn't a land border with Germany to allow millions of them to simply jump over the border and invade. With millions invading, there is no reason to assimilate, they are simply taking over and in many areas have already done so. They don't seek to better themselves by adopting the culture of the US, they seek to turn the US into the failed state they left behind.

Well people at the time seemed to think differently but I'm sure you know better. Do you realize that due to the sheer number of German (and a few other countries') immigrants, Pennsylvania was a majority non-English immigrant colony around the time Franklin was writing this?

ie: the percentage of immigrants in Pennsylvania was actually way higher than the percentage of Mexican immigrants. Seriously, just stop.

That's all irrelevant to the discussion though. The point is that scum like Pelosi want us to ignore the laws when she doesn't find them politically convenient. And to think that not only is a scumbag like her in congress, she's actually tabbed as a "leader" by her fellow idiot democrats.

Actually Pelosi is arguing to change the laws, which of course is a good idea.

 

[bradly1101]

... First thing that jumps out at me is that there's a known inverse relationship between income and fertility rate. The poorer a place is the more likely its population is to grow.

As a shepard for the poor, Catholicism is growing around the world. Since they frown on birth control, it also causes over population.

We've past a physical and political breaking point when it comes to population.

 

[xj0hnx]

She would probably be laughed out of Texas.

There is no way in hell I would vote for her. If she was the only one on the ballot I would write in mickey mouse.

Guess you've never heard of Sheila Jackson Lee, Race baiting Congress critter from Houston, mega proggy lib.

 

[michal1980]

White man had no desire to integrate when he took this land, why do we hold others to a higher standard?

I notice in the Japanese market (where they have the best fish), most of the packaging is in Japanese. Does that mean they don't want to integrate?

Multi-language packaging is just marketing, not a declaration of segregation.

but single non-English language is a form of segregation.

 

[michal1980]

You're right, because societies change over time we should learn nothing from history.

your right we should learn from history.

we tired the blanket amnesty in the 80's. and today have even more illegals because we failed to enforce our laws.

So since we learn from history, until we start true enforcement. There should be no amnesty. Even then, I'd only support giving them legal status, not citizenship.

 

[Texashiker]

Guess you've never heard of Sheila Jackson Lee, Race baiting Congress critter from Houston, mega proggy lib.

Wikipedia says her district includes inner city houston.

Well yea she is going to be liberal democrat. Are you going to risk your job by telling people to get a job and get off welfare?