Cultural unity

Funding? :rofl3:

The Senate see's potential voters & the Representativesare too busy pissing & moaning over who left the friggin door open.

Needed rules:
#1-Children born in the United States to parents who are not citizens are not allowed to claim US citizenship until their 19th birthday. If one parent is a citizen, & the other is a legal immigrant-immediate citizenship rights. If the other is an illegal, the illegal alien will be deported & given preference after a 180 day waiting period if there is a marriage. If none, they stand in line.
 
Bah the all seeing all knowing Winky knows the solution.

Ya see everything is simple if you can see clearly.

Alls ya gotta do is answer a few simple questions
and then depending on the answers, you take
the appropriate course of action.

(life is funny like that)

1st question:

Does anyone who can get their feet on our soil
then have all the rights afforded everyone else
in this country?
 
The Georgia Security and Immigration Compliance Act, signed into law by Republican Gov. Sonny Perdue, denies many state services paid for by taxpayers to people who are in the United States illegally.

It also forces contractors doing business with the state to verify the legal status of new workers, and requires police to notify immigration officials if people charged with crimes are illegal immigrants.

"It's our responsibility to ensure that our famous Georgia hospitality is not abused, that our taxpayers are not taken advantage of and that our citizens are protected," Perdue said before signing the law.

But Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, a Democrat, backed by key law enforcement officials, vetoed the bill in her state, the nation's hot spot for illegal crossing of the roughly 2,000-mile-long U.S.-Mexico border, saying there were no resources to pay police and prosecutors for an increased burden.

Under the proposal, first-time offenders would have faced a misdemeanor charge and up to six months in jail. A second offense would have been a felony, punishable by up to one year in jail.

Arizona officials also were concerned about its effect in the community.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1853053

So, Georgia, where it's a problem, tries to take concrete steps. Arizona, which by all accounts is drowning, fails to even go that far.

Hmm.
 
HomeLAN said:
So, Georgia, where it's a problem, tries to take concrete steps. Arizona, which by all accounts is drowning, fails to even go that far.

Hmm.
Too close to California.
 
Gato_Solo said:
And what would you describe a situation where an area is flooded with foreigners who do not want to join the area they moved to, without permission, and insist on not being targeted as criminal?

Here ya go
 
The Mexican government blasted Georgia's new illegal immigration law Tuesday, calling it a half-measure that discriminates against Mexicans.

Ruben Aguilar, spokesman for President Vicente Fox, told reporters Tuesday morning that implementing parts of the Georgia law could result in "acts of discrimination" against Mexicans living in Georgia. "It's the position of [Fox] that the half-measures in this law are insufficient to resolve ... the complex phenomenon of immigration between Mexico and the United States," Aguilar said.

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/stories/0419metmexico.html

:rofl4: Fox, you numbnuts, we're not trying to solve imiigration between the US and Mexico. We're trying to enforce the law.

"This is not an anti-immigrant law. It is a fairness issue. This is saying that people should come in the front door, not the back door, and that the laws of our country and our state need to be obeyed. We are a hospitable people in the state of Georgia, but when folks wish to immigrate to the country, they need to do it in a legal way," McLagan said.

Yeah, the Mexican gov't. sure is an effective partner and a valued friend. With official reactions like this, I think we might be better off doing what we need to do without much consulting.
 
If you can get your dusty brown feet
on American soil then you enjoy all
the benefits of being an American citizen.
 
San Diego -- AS MEMBERS of Congress wrap up their spring break, many Americans want immigration reform that is both tough and compassionate.

Beef up enforcement, they tell pollsters, but also grant legal status to at least some of the 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants already here.

Lawmakers now appear ready to deliver along those lines. No surprise there. Whenever Washington turns its attention to immigration reform, say every 20 years or so, we always hear words like "tough" and "compassionate."

But what we need is an immigration policy that is nuanced and honest.

Nuance has been in short supply in this debate ever since Benjamin Franklin lit into German immigrants around the time of the American Revolution.

Today, you can support increasing the number of Border Patrol agents without supporting amateur hour in the form of the Minutemen. You can support fences along portions of the border without going along with building a 2,000-mile-long wall. You can support converting unauthorized presence in the United States from a civil violation to a criminal offense -- an idea that was recently squashed by House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist -- without saying it should be a felony rather than a misdemeanor. And you can be alarmed over the cost of providing education and health care to the U.S-born children of illegal immigrants without concluding that the solution is to deprive those children of U.S. citizenship.

On the other side of the great divide, you can sympathize with the plight of illegal immigrants without convincing yourself that they haven't really committed a serious infraction by coming to the United States without the proper documents. You can admire the fact that demonstrators would protest for a cause they believe in and still feel uneasy about the waving of Mexican flags. You can support increased border security and fairer immigration laws without being branded a racist or a xenophobe. And you can oppose the concept of a guest-worker program not because it harms the country, or the economic well-being of the native-born, but because it's harmful to the foreign workers themselves.

Honesty has also been awfully scarce in this debate. If we were being honest, Americans would have to admit that illegal immigration is a self-inflicted wound and that the cities and states that find themselves combating an influx of these immigrants also often have booming economies and plenty of work for the undocumented.

If we were being honest, we wouldn't bother acting surprised by the fact that there are so many illegal immigrants living in our communities -- not when we've been hiring them or turning a blind eye to those who hire them for years.
If we were being honest, we would accept that demonstrators are not demanding benefits or asking for handouts, but merely fighting back against what they see as an attack on immigrants and an attempt to make criminals out of hard-working, taxpaying members of society.

If we were being honest, we would have to accept that there are, as President Bush says, all sorts of hard and dirty "jobs that Americans won't do" -- at any wage -- and that this is a sign of achievement and progress and not something to be ashamed of.
And if we were being honest, we would have to admit that those U.S. citizens who find themselves competing for jobs with illegal immigrants who can't speak English and have sixth-grade educations -- and losing out, at that -- should take the hint that the time has come for them to get more education and training.

Never mind tough. Forget compassionate. Congress should ditch the old scripts and stop repeating the familiar sound bites.

What do they have to lose? They're not kidding anyone as it is. Just look at what happened recently in the Senate. Those "tough" Republicans weren't tough enough to propose stiffer fines or jail time or asset forfeiture for businesses and others who hire illegal immigrants, and those "compassionate" Democrats weren't compassionate enough not to sell out Latinos if it meant serving the interests of organized labor.

So what's the point of this charade? Instead of trying to be something they're not to fool their political bases, both parties would be better off coming clean and striving for the two things that, whenever we talk about immigration reform, always seem to get lost in the mix: nuance and honesty.

Then the American people would be wise to do the same.



Source..........
 
Thought I'd slip this little treatise in here...some interesting questions raised here.




Mexican flag flies across U.S.
Wednesday, April 5, 2006
By Brian Mosely

I have a question that some people are not going to like.
Why is it OK that thousands upon thousands of immigrant students can get away with walking out of class while waving a flag of a foreign country, but if a single kid that is a citizen of this nation wears a T-shirt or anything else bearing the Confederate flag, he or she is kicked out of school and labeled a racist?

Like I said; tough question. I mean, both groups are displaying pride in their particular heritage, right?

This came to mind as some of the photos from all the Hispanic protests from the past several days have come over the wires. Most of the major media have focused on the size of the gatherings and the immigration questions, but some of the messages borne by the protesters deserves closer examination and discussion.

*snip*

I also suggest you take a look at the Website www.mexica-movement.org to see how some see this immigration issue and then Google the phrase "La Reconquista." These points-of-view may disturb you.

*snip*

Here's a fresh idea: How about America's Congress approving a measure favorable to Americans for a change. Since recent polls show that around 75 percent of the public want illegal immigration laws enforced, members of that body and the government need to be reminded that they work for us, not the other way around.

Or maybe some politicians just want 11 million new voters.

*snip*

As for all that waving of the Mexican flag, can someone please explain why some folks take so much pride in a place they couldn't wait to get away from and are seemingly terrified of being sent back to?

Full article if you dare
 
SouthernN'Proud said:
Here's a fresh idea: How about America's Congress approving a measure favorable to Americans for a change. Since recent polls show that around 75 percent of the public want illegal immigration laws enforced, members of that body and the government need to be reminded that they work for us, not the other way around.

"Beef up enforcement, they tell pollsters, but also grant legal status to at least some of the 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants already here."


As for all that waving of the Mexican flag, can someone please explain why some folks take so much pride in a place they couldn't wait to get away from and are seemingly terrified of being sent back to?

I'd think it be obvious by now it's the whole "money to feed the family" thing that makes them want to get away.
 
Feed the fires!!!
US authorities have arrested almost 1,200 people in what they say is the largest raid of its kind on migrants working illegally in the country.

The alleged illegal immigrants worked for the same crate company and were held in nine different states.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said the raid was a warning to workers and employers "who tolerate or perpetuate a shadow economy".

The US Senate has been deadlocked over plans to reform immigration rules.

The Senate is due to resume its debate in a few days.

President George W Bush has proposed the introduction of a "guest-worker" scheme - but this faces stiff opposition from some in his own Republican party who see it as being too soft on lawbreakers.

According to the BBC's Washington correspondent, James Coomarasamy, the latest raid is clearly designed to counter that impression.

'More deportations'

The target of the raid was Ifco - a German-based company that specialises in the manufacture of crates.

Seven officials from the company were among those arrested.

"Employers and workers alike should be on notice that the status quo has changed," Mr Chertoff said.

He said his department would use every authority within its power "to shut down businesses that exploit an illegal workforce to turn a profit".

He added that those who entered the US illegally could not be allowed to think they were safe once they were inside the country.

Mr Chertoff said his department planned to increase the number of illegal immigrants deported from the US and prosecute more US firms that employed them.

An estimated 11.5 million illegal immigrants are believed to be living in the US.

Recent efforts to criminalise their status have triggered nationwide protests from pro-immigrant and Hispanic groups.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4928764.stm
 
At least they're hitting the employer, too. You aren't gonna have to have too many execs do the perp walk before word gets around and this shit slows way down. Take away the money, and they'll stop coming.

Take away the money and ship their asses home, and it'll happen even faster.

This is a good first step. Let's see some follow-through.
 
The follow through is going to be protests and perhaps violent protests :shrug:
 
Luis G said:
The follow through is going to be protests and perhaps violent protests :shrug:
I don't think so yet. This is just a drop in the bucket. When (okay, If) they start enforcing the existing laws enough to make a significant impact I suspect we'll learn that middle-eastern terrorists were never really such a big deal...
 
Back
Top