RE: Immigration raids

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Yeah, either I'm evasive or you asked a dumb question. Gee, I wonder which it is.

You realize that the legislation passed in the 80's was more than "COME ON IN GUYS, YEE-HAWWWW!" right? They screwed it up because they kept immigration just as hard as it was before, but just legalized the people who were already here. Amnesty without comprehensive immigration reform is a waste of time, because more illegal people will just come in. Nobody is trying to pass an amnesty bill without comprehensive reform however, and there's a wide range of how we might do it. That's why when you ask 'what do you think will happen?', anyone with a brain would say 'i have no idea, it depends on how we do it'.

Playing ignorant seems to suit you.

Nothing is stopping illegals from coming across the border and if they feel there will be chance for amnesty that will only INCREASE the number of illegals sneaking in or overstaying their visas. It's not rocket science, you don't reward people for breaking the law unless you want more lawbreakers.

How is pointing out how your example was bad 'playing ignorant'? If you don't want people breaking the law, you even out the incentive structure so it is in their best interests to behave legally. This is done through both penalties for breaking the law, and a viable and attractive option to behave legally. This is civics 101.

We've had other discussions in other threads on this (the rancher one if I remember) and it doesn't seem like you're able to think rationally when it comes to immigration issues. Your rage over the issue has seriously clouded your judgment.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Yeah, either I'm evasive or you asked a dumb question. Gee, I wonder which it is.

You realize that the legislation passed in the 80's was more than "COME ON IN GUYS, YEE-HAWWWW!" right? They screwed it up because they kept immigration just as hard as it was before, but just legalized the people who were already here. Amnesty without comprehensive immigration reform is a waste of time, because more illegal people will just come in. Nobody is trying to pass an amnesty bill without comprehensive reform however, and there's a wide range of how we might do it. That's why when you ask 'what do you think will happen?', anyone with a brain would say 'i have no idea, it depends on how we do it'.

Playing ignorant seems to suit you.

Nothing is stopping illegals from coming across the border and if they feel there will be chance for amnesty that will only INCREASE the number of illegals sneaking in or overstaying their visas. It's not rocket science, you don't reward people for breaking the law unless you want more lawbreakers.

How is pointing out how your example was bad 'playing ignorant'? If you don't want people breaking the law, you even out the incentive structure so it is in their best interests to behave legally. This is done through both penalties for breaking the law, and a viable and attractive option to behave legally. This is civics 101.

We've had other discussions in other threads on this (the rancher one if I remember) and it doesn't seem like you're able to think rationally when it comes to immigration issues. Your rage over the issue has seriously clouded your judgment.

Your playing ignorant because if we had deported them (or half of them) instead of granting them amnesty we would have sent a message to come here legally or not at all. There was even a rush of illegals and people lying about how long they had been here to gain amnesty last time. We opened up the gate and said, come on in. Now we need to shut it before we can clean up the latest mess.

Civic 101 teaches you to reward lawbreakers? Got a link to that? :laugh:

Seriously dude, you are way out in left field on this one. I live 1500 miles from the border and we have all kinds of illegals in my small city. Get your head out of your ass and stop the illegals coming in because first chance we get we're sending them back to California and th4en they can be your problem.

Man gets 13 months in prison for hiring illegal immigrants

Man gets prison for hiring illegal immigrants at Wheaton restaurant

Iowa kosher slaughterhouse supervisor sentenced to 3 years for hiring illegal immigrants

I guess I'm not the only one whose "rage" is clouding his judgment.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Your playing ignorant because if we had deported them (or half of them) instead of granting them amnesty we would have sent a message to come here legally or not at all. There was even a rush of illegals and people lying about how long they had been here to gain amnesty last time. We opened up the gate and said, come on in. Now we need to shut it before we can clean up the latest mess.

Civic 101 teaches you to reward lawbreakers? Got a link to that? :laugh:

Seriously dude, you are way out in left field on this one. I live 1500 miles from the border and we have all kinds of illegals in my small city. Get your head out of your ass and stop the illegals coming in because first chance we get we're sending them back to California and th4en they can be your problem.

Man gets 13 months in prison for hiring illegal immigrants

Man gets prison for hiring illegal immigrants at Wheaton restaurant

Iowa kosher slaughterhouse supervisor sentenced to 3 years for hiring illegal immigrants

I guess I'm not the only one whose "rage" is clouding his judgment.

You're starting to get a little unhinged here. How does the 1980's amnesty and its effects possibly related to if I'm 'playing ignorant' or not?

You honestly think deportations would stop people from coming here? That's awfully naive. Civics 101 doesn't teach you to reward lawbreakers, it tells you the fundamental basis for writing laws, ie: you need to not only punish illegal behavior, but make effective avenues for legal behavior. You think that by making the penalties harsher for people coming here to feed their families, that they are suddenly going to stop needing and wanting to feed their families? They will come anyway. Like I said, your approach is naive.

I also fail to see how your links relate.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Your playing ignorant because if we had deported them (or half of them) instead of granting them amnesty we would have sent a message to come here legally or not at all. There was even a rush of illegals and people lying about how long they had been here to gain amnesty last time. We opened up the gate and said, come on in. Now we need to shut it before we can clean up the latest mess.

Civic 101 teaches you to reward lawbreakers? Got a link to that? :laugh:

Seriously dude, you are way out in left field on this one. I live 1500 miles from the border and we have all kinds of illegals in my small city. Get your head out of your ass and stop the illegals coming in because first chance we get we're sending them back to California and th4en they can be your problem.

Man gets 13 months in prison for hiring illegal immigrants

Man gets prison for hiring illegal immigrants at Wheaton restaurant

Iowa kosher slaughterhouse supervisor sentenced to 3 years for hiring illegal immigrants

I guess I'm not the only one whose "rage" is clouding his judgment.

You're starting to get a little unhinged here. How does the 1980's amnesty and its effects possibly related to if I'm 'playing ignorant' or not?

You honestly think deportations would stop people from coming here? That's awfully naive. Civics 101 doesn't teach you to reward lawbreakers, it tells you the fundamental basis for writing laws, ie: you need to not only punish illegal behavior, but make effective avenues for legal behavior. You think that by making the penalties harsher for people coming here to feed their families, that they are suddenly going to stop needing and wanting to feed their families? They will come anyway. Like I said, your approach is naive.

I also fail to see how your links relate.

Then you fail at both thinking and logic. You are utterly and completely in denial.

Civics is for Citizens and guess what? Mexicans aren't citizens and as such they don't get a voice in what our laws are. We have intelligent, hard working, people from all over this world, every country on the face of the globe I would dare say, that would like to come into this country, but the more illegals that come here the fewer of these people we can accomadate.

How can you sit there and try to infer that people against illegal immigration are xenophobic?? It is you who would deny fair and equal access to the rest of the world in favor of the people from our neighbor to the south. I think you're racist in favor of the Hispanics.

My opinion of you has dropped several notches.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Then you fail at both thinking and logic. You are utterly and completely in denial.

Civics is for Citizens and guess what? Mexicans aren't citizens and as such they don't get a voice in what our laws are. We have intelligent, hard working, people from all over this world, every country on the face of the globe I would dare say, that would like to come into this country, but the more illegals that come here the fewer of these people we can accomadate.

How can you sit there and try to infer that people against illegal immigration are xenophobic?? It is you who would deny fair and equal access to the rest of the world in favor of the people from our neighbor to the south. I think you're racist in favor of the Hispanics.

My opinion of you has dropped several notches.

Like I give a shit what your opinion is of me. You said the same thing last time in the rancher thread where you became totally unhinged. I don't know what it is about this issue that blinds you with rage, but you don't seem to get like this in other threads.

Civics is not about if someone is a citizen or not, it's how you run your country. People from all over the world are not attempting to come here to work agriculture jobs for crap wages, the mexicans aren't crowding them out, sorry. I don't infer that people who are against illegal immigration are xenophobic, I believe that our current immigration law is strongly influenced by a good dose of xenophobia however, and I think that those who believe it should persist in its current form or be made harsher are xenophobic. Like I've said before, this nativist tradition has a long and storied tradition in America and so I'm not really surprised by it, but it's still not something I can condone.

 

[piasabird]

No amnesty not now not ever.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Then you fail at both thinking and logic. You are utterly and completely in denial.

Civics is for Citizens and guess what? Mexicans aren't citizens and as such they don't get a voice in what our laws are. We have intelligent, hard working, people from all over this world, every country on the face of the globe I would dare say, that would like to come into this country, but the more illegals that come here the fewer of these people we can accomadate.

How can you sit there and try to infer that people against illegal immigration are xenophobic?? It is you who would deny fair and equal access to the rest of the world in favor of the people from our neighbor to the south. I think you're racist in favor of the Hispanics.

My opinion of you has dropped several notches.

Like I give a shit what your opinion is of me. You said the same thing last time in the rancher thread where you became totally unhinged. I don't know what it is about this issue that blinds you with rage, but you don't seem to get like this in other threads.

Civics is not about if someone is a citizen or not, it's how you run your country. People from all over the world are not attempting to come here to work agriculture jobs for crap wages, the mexicans aren't crowding them out, sorry. I don't infer that people who are against illegal immigration are xenophobic, I believe that our current immigration law is strongly influenced by a good dose of xenophobia however, and I think that those who believe it should persist in its current form or be made harsher are xenophobic. Like I've said before, this nativist tradition has a long and storied tradition in America and so I'm not really surprised by it, but it's still not something I can condone.

Your opinion is so full of your own prejudices that it's not worth the effort to discuss the matter with you any longer. You are obviously slanted not by doing what's best for the people of this country, but by doing what's best for the Mexicans.

I will not change my opinion on sealing the border before we engage in any kind of amnesty or guest worker (slave labor) program. It's not fair to Americans and it's not fair to the people who want to come here legally.

You're going to have to cpome to terms with the fact that Americans have been "educated" by the last amnesty. One of those just isn't going to fly again in this country until we do something about guarding our border.

I see Obama was talking about helping Mexico by stopping all the illegal guns and cash flowing out of our country. I didn't watch the whole thing but I didn't hear one word about sealing/guarding our border to insure the saftey of Americans. LOL, do you dipshits think you can make that fly? I predict a huge turnaround in the political winds in 2010 and Obama will be out on his ear in 2012 if he fucks with guns again. Even the conservative Democrats can see the writing on the wall already. The liberal wing of the Democratic Party doesn't have a brain in it's collective head.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Your opinion is so full of your own prejudices that it's not worth the effort to discuss the matter with you any longer. You are obviously slanted not by doing what's best for the people of this country, but by doing what's best for the Mexicans.

I will not change my opinion on sealing the border before we engage in any kind of amnesty or guest worker (slave labor) program. It's not fair to Americans and it's not fair to the people who want to come here legally.

You're going to have to cpome to terms with the fact that Americans have been "educated" by the last amnesty. One of those just isn't going to fly again in this country until we do something about guarding our border.

I see Obama was talking about helping Mexico by stopping all the illegal guns and cash flowing out of our country. I didn't watch the whole thing but I didn't hear one word about sealing/guarding our border to insure the saftey of Americans. LOL, do you dipshits think you can make that fly? I predict a huge turnaround in the political winds in 2010 and Obama will be out on his ear in 2012 if he fucks with guns again. Even the conservative Democrats can see the writing on the wall already. The liberal wing of the Democratic Party doesn't have a brain in it's collective head.

It's hard to take you seriously when you say things like 'you don't want to do what's best for Americans, but what's best for Mexicans'. Really?..... Really? That's what I'm talking about, you're not behaving rationally. You don't have to change your mind on the issue, but you should make an effort to discuss it in a more coherent fashion.

As far as gun control goes, you are simply poorly informed. Polling clearly shows that Americans support stricter gun control laws, by an average of 10-15 points, a pretty hefty margin. So no, it is unlikely that Obama would be 'out on his ear' if he were to try and restrict guns more. I am opposed to most gun control laws myself, but the significant majority of Americans aren't. Sorry to rain on your parade.

By simple luck in timing I find it highly unlikely that Obama will not be re-elected in 2012. It is nearly certain the economy will have improved by that point, and Obama will take the credit for it (no matter if he actually helped or not). That alone will probably get him another term, and one in which he will be even more powerful.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Your opinion is so full of your own prejudices that it's not worth the effort to discuss the matter with you any longer. You are obviously slanted not by doing what's best for the people of this country, but by doing what's best for the Mexicans.

I will not change my opinion on sealing the border before we engage in any kind of amnesty or guest worker (slave labor) program. It's not fair to Americans and it's not fair to the people who want to come here legally.

You're going to have to cpome to terms with the fact that Americans have been "educated" by the last amnesty. One of those just isn't going to fly again in this country until we do something about guarding our border.

I see Obama was talking about helping Mexico by stopping all the illegal guns and cash flowing out of our country. I didn't watch the whole thing but I didn't hear one word about sealing/guarding our border to insure the saftey of Americans. LOL, do you dipshits think you can make that fly? I predict a huge turnaround in the political winds in 2010 and Obama will be out on his ear in 2012 if he fucks with guns again. Even the conservative Democrats can see the writing on the wall already. The liberal wing of the Democratic Party doesn't have a brain in it's collective head.

It's hard to take you seriously when you say things like 'you don't want to do what's best for Americans, but what's best for Mexicans'. Really?..... Really? That's what I'm talking about, you're not behaving rationally. You don't have to change your mind on the issue, but you should make an effort to discuss it in a more coherent fashion.

As far as gun control goes, you are simply poorly informed. Polling clearly shows that Americans support stricter gun control laws, by an average of 10-15 points, a pretty hefty margin. So no, it is unlikely that Obama would be 'out on his ear' if he were to try and restrict guns more. I am opposed to most gun control laws myself, but the significant majority of Americans aren't. Sorry to rain on your parade.

By simple luck in timing I find it highly unlikely that Obama will not be re-elected in 2012. It is nearly certain the economy will have improved by that point, and Obama will take the credit for it (no matter if he actually helped or not). That alone will probably get him another term, and one in which he will be even more powerful.

Yes, really. We have a whole world full of people and many would like to immigrate to this country. You obviously favor the Mexicans over all of them and would even stop landowners from preventing criminal trespass on their own land to enable the Mexicans to more freely come.

You need to stop putting your little labels on everything, the only labels you need to worry about are right and wrong. we can only handle so many people in this country before it turns into a shithole without enough resources to go around. How can you justify that it is right for any Mexican that wants to come here while ignoring the many deserving people standing in line to do it right/leagally??


If you can't even make a prediction about what would happen if we give amnesty to the current illegals without beefing up our boarder security then your totally discredited and I really don't give a shit what you think. All you do is rationalize the end result that suits your agenda. I'm done wasting my time responding anymore to this thread.

Bye