Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
zybathegeek

What is happening on the Arizona Mexico border

Rate this topic

38 posts in this topic

View Postthe future democratic voters of America,

 

 

The GOP really dropped the ball, by NOT addressing this issue when they had the opportunity.

 

Considering that all the illegals are future Democrats, why did they fail to do something when they could?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View PostThe GOP really dropped the ball, by NOT addressing this issue when they had the opportunity.

 

Considering that all the illegals are future Democrats, why did they fail to do something when they could?

 

Didn't President Bush try? I forget. Can you refresh my memory? It was just discussed recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nothing is ever done,

I am not happy with the Dems,

I am not happy with the GOP,

and trying to point fingers at any one side seems pointless,

seeing how both parties seem to go out of their way NOT to do anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View PostThe GOP really dropped the ball, by NOT addressing this issue when they had the opportunity.

 

Considering that all the illegals are future Democrats, why did they fail to do something when they could?

 

why either failed to do anything?

no one will know,

speculation?

Dems: want them as voters?

Reps: want to please the businesses that employ them?

 

regardless, both parties have failed,

and i dont see anything changing anytime soon,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Companies are now really left to scratching their headsheadscratch.gif

 

Hire an illegal alien and they get punished by the feds. if employers try to protect themselves and request additional information beyond a SS card they get punished by the feds. Says to me the gov does not intend on fixing the problem. I'll find the article posted the WSJ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View PostDidn't President Bush try? I forget. Can you refresh my memory? It was just discussed recently.

 

Bush tried but his attempt was amnesty. His own party pulled their support and wanted reform that would enforce the existing laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View Postnothing is ever done,

 

 

I am not happy with the Dems,

 

 

I am not happy with the GOP,

 

 

and trying to point fingers at any one side seems pointless,

 

 

seeing how both parties seem to go out of their way NOT to do anything.

 

couldn't agree more

 

 

here's a very good summation of the problem today and feeble attempts to address it in the past (quite in the past)

 

 

worth the read - bear in mind, the author is a NJ columnist - hence the example from the Newark killings ...

 

 

"New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson was on "Face the Nation" Sunday informing us in grave tones that the immigration law scheduled to take effect next week in Arizona will be "divisive."

 

 

Unfortunately for the Democrat, the screen was soon filled with the results of a CBS poll showing that that almost three-quarters of Americans, 74 percent, believe the Arizona approach is either "just right" or "doesn't go far enough." A mere 23 percent said the law "goes too far."

 

 

You won't find this sort of consensus on any other major issue, from guns to abortion. Yet the leaders of both major parties don't seem to get the message that Americans are fed up with the feds' refusal to enforce immigration law.

 

 

I see a parallel between the Arizona fight and the recent fight here in Jersey over property tax reform. The pols of both parties boasted of passing yet another tax cap full of holes. But the homeowners I know hold no hope that this cap will be any better than the prior three.

 

 

Similarly, that so-called "comprehensive" immigration reform that's being pushed in Washington is an almost exact replica of the 1986 amnesty program that was supposed to permanently solve the problem. A 1990 interview with Alan Nelson, who had recently retired as director of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, found him boasting of "Enforcement of all aspects against illegal immigration - border enforcement, the sanctions dealing with the job market, the SAVE program dealing with keeping illegals from getting benefits to which they're not entitled, and tougher provisions against aliens involved in crime."

 

 

Sound familiar? The only difference is that back then the sponsors of the bill were honest enough to call it amnesty. This time they won't even whisper the "A" word. Instead, backers of the latest reform bill like to say that newly legal residents will "move to the back of the line" for citizenship.

 

 

For some reason, though, these reformers never mention Reforma. That's the name of the boulevard in Mexico City where that line forms. Over the years, whenever I walked by the American Embassy on that avenue, the line of people waiting to legally enter the U.S. stretched for blocks. A reform that sent the illegals to the end of that line would be embraced by an overwhelming majority of Americans.

 

 

But seemingly not by our governor. In a recent interview with the Politico website in which he was touted as a rising star of conservatism, Christie channeled his inner moderate. After stating, "I say things pretty bluntly," our governor then said this about immigration reform: "I think President Obama doesn't do this at his own risk because it's affecting the economy in the country ... To me, I think the president's really gotta show the leadership on this."

 

 

Got that? Me neither. But what our governor seems to be saying fits in with a suspicion held by many Americans: To Republican leaders, immigration reform equals cheap labor. As for the Democratic leaders, they want a source of new voters.

 

 

Everyday Americans, meanwhile, just want the immigration law enforced. And in this regard Christie took part in an incident that shows the importance of such enforcement, especially against those accused of crimes, as is the intent in Arizona.

 

 

In 2008, when Christie was U.S. Attorney, Morristown Mayor Don Cresitello sought permission for his town to join the federal 287g program, which gives local officials the power to enforce federal immigration law.

 

 

"He was in outright opposition to me," said Cresitello of Christie.

 

 

At the height of the controversy, Christie made an appearance at a local church to speak against Cresitello's plan. In a masterpiece of bad timing, that appearance occurred the very morning news broke of those Newark schoolyard shootings. One of the gang members charged with murder in the case was an illegal immigrant who had been arrested the prior year following a barroom fight - exactly the sort of offense that would have gotten him deported under the 287g approach.

 

 

"There's still no question that if Newark had taken part in 287g, those murders never would have happened," said Cresitello.

 

 

The ex-mayor, who is a Democrat by the way, actually supports so-called comprehensive immigration reform. But he insists enforcement must come first. Which it must.

 

 

Oh, and by the way, in Spanish "déjÃ* vu" translates to "deja visto.""

 

 

so, once again we will wind up with SQUAT!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View PostThe GOP really dropped the ball, by NOT addressing this issue when they had the opportunity.

 

Considering that all the illegals are future Democrats, why did they fail to do something when they could?

 

 

Folks keep saying this but the Secure the Border Initiative was introduced in 2005 by the Bush Administration. The virtual fence was being tested in Arizona to see if it was a viable solution but funding was cut by Janet Napolitano. Also, the Hispanic vote went something like 60% to Gore and 35% to Bush in 2000, BUT in the 2004 election the margin against Kerry was only 9 points versus the 25 points in the Gore election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View PostThat may be true, but in this case, Az is trying to do something. And the Dems are trying to block it. In this case, who should we point at?

 

 

the AZ law strikes me as unconstitutional.

 

I support ACTING, but that isn't carte blanche to enact any law you wish.

 

the AZ law seems more about intimidation than meaningful border security.

 

In my opinion.

I'm all for doing something, but prefer it to be effective and Constitutional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View PostFolks keep saying this but the Secure the Border Initiative was introduced in 2005 by the Bush Administration.

 

 

why wait so long?

from what I remember it was an unfunded feel good piece of nothing,

election pandering and little more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.