Page 13 of 124 FirstFirst ... 3910111213141516172363113 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 195 of 1854
  1. #181
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,280

    Re: The Senate's "Grand Bargain" [Immigration Debate]

    Quote Originally Posted by jimzinsocal View Post
    Subject: Legal immigrants planning to become illegal to get a Z-Visa [Rich Lowry]

    E-mail:
    This really frosts me, and I think it says a lot about the current amnesty bill that illegal would discuss going illegal in order to qualify for a Z-Visa. Here is the money quote in my book: “if this law passes in its current, there will be an exodus to be illegal.” Here is the link.
    It's getting to that point.. where it's better to be an illegal.. you have more rights than those who immigrated legally or were born citizens.

    Illegal....?? Free heath care this way.. just drop into any hospital emergency room. They cannot turn you away by law.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  2. #182
    Joined
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Colorafornia, USSA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    13,823

    Re: The Senate's "Grand Bargain" [Immigration Debate]

    Quote Originally Posted by jimzinsocal View Post
    This really frosts me, and I think it says a lot about the current amnesty bill that illegal would discuss going illegal in order to qualify for a Z-Visa. Here is the money quote in my book: “if this law passes in its current, there will be an exodus to be illegal.” Here is the link.
    Exactly! Our politicians know this but they just don't give a rat's ass.
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

    Edmund Burke

    RIP PCPER TLR
    7-14-19

  3. #183
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,280

    Re: The Senate's "Grand Bargain" [Immigration Debate]

    Quote Originally Posted by AMDScooter View Post
    I'd pay to se it... "LETS GET READY TO RUMMMMMMMBBBBLLLLEEEE!!!!!"

    The Editors’ Challenge
    Looks like the WSJ is not interested in debating the issue with the people they freely malign..... sounds awfully familiar.

    Steve Moore Has the Right Idea, But....

    Steve Moore Has the Right Idea, But.... [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

    ...we were so encouraged to hear Steve Moore's got the fighting spirit, via Bill Bennett's radio show this morning, but where is our official response from the Wall Street Journal editorial page? Where's Paul Gigot's rational response? The blogosphere, our readers on both sides of the issue, sound like they are anxious to have the editors of National Review and the Wall Street Journal have a constructive, fun, Firing Line-style debate about this important issue. So where are the Journal editors? Here's our official Day 2 invitation to the WSJ editors.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  4. #184
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,682

    Re: The Senate's "Grand Bargain" [Immigration Debate]

    I have to say NRO is actually attempting to accomplish something constructive. Lets have a reasoned debate.
    Sheesh are we to not have every point in the legislation cross examined before it becomes law?
    And isnt this what our elected royalty are supposed to do?
    Beat the bill to death and make sure flaws are fixed etc?

    What the elected fools are doing is working the expected votes[voters] .....down the road.
    Last edited by jimzinsocal; 06-01-2007 at 02:27 PM.

  5. #185
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,280

    Re: The Senate's "Grand Bargain" [Immigration Debate]

    Quote Originally Posted by jimzinsocal View Post
    I have to say NRO is actually attempting to accomplish something constructive. Lets have a reasoned debate.
    Sheesh are we to not have every point in the legislation cross examined before it becomes law?
    And isnt this what our elected royalty are supposed to do?
    Beat the bill to death and make sure flaws are fixed etc?

    What the elected fools are doing is working the expected votes[voters] .....down the road.
    Notable side effect of the immigration bill... I have not heard any of those familiar voices who continually claim the Repug base "blindly follows" GWB of late. Sooo... fire DOES melt steel.. and... D
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  6. #186
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,280

    Re: The Senate's "Grand Bargain" [Immigration Debate]

    This effin bill is a shameful travesty.

    26 Reasons To Kill The Bill Now!!!!!!!!!

    1. Security doesn’t come first in this bill. This bill would immediately legalize illegal aliens that are currently in the country. The only way Congress will actually see to it that the border security and enforcement provisions in the bill will be implemented is if they have to do them before they even consider an amnesty for the people who are here.

    2. Illegal aliens won’t have to pay back taxes — where do we get the same deal? The whole idea that illegal aliens shouldn’t have to pay the taxes they already owe for working in the United States is utterly and completely offensive because it actually gives them a privilege that American citizens aren’t getting: forgiveness for taxes owed to the IRS.

    3. If passed, this bill will make taxpayers pay the legal bills for illegal aliens seeking amnesty. Tucked away is a provision that would allow lawyers in the federally-funded legal services program to represent illegal aliens, which they are presently barred from doing.

    4. This bill rewards illegal aliens for breaking our laws. There are tens of millions of people who respect our laws and our country, waiting patiently, in line, often in their home countries, to get a chance to come here. Under this bill, illegal aliens will immediately be eligible for a “Z Visa” which allows them to work, go to school, and — this is important — stay here for the rest of their lives if they so choose because there is no limit on the number of times it can be renewed.

    5. The bill gives the government only one business day to conduct a background check to determine whether an applicant is a criminal or a terrorist. It is impossible, of course, to determine in a single day whether someone is a terrorist or a criminal.

    6. In the bill Section 601(g)(2), illegal-alien gang members would be eligible for amnesty merely by signing a “renunciation of gang affiliation.”

    7. Gang-bangers and other criminals, who have been ordered to leave the United States by an immigration judge but defy the ruling, are called absconders. Section 601(d)(1)(I) permits U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to grant an absconder a Z visa anyway if he can show that being forced to leave the United States “would result in extreme hardship” to the alien, his spouse, parent or child.

    8. The bill effectively shuts down our immigration-court system. If an alien in the removal process is eligible for the Z visa, the immigration judge must close the proceedings and offer the alien the chance to apply for the amnesty.

    9. If ICE officials apprehend an alien who appears eligible for the Z visa (in other words, just about any illegal alien), they can’t detain him. Instead, ICE must help him apply for the Z visa.

    Rather than initiating removal proceedings, ICE will be initiating amnesty applications. It’s like turning the Drug Enforcement Agency into a needle-distribution network.

    10. To qualify for the Z-visa amnesty, an illegal alien need only have a job (or be the parent, spouse, or child of someone with a job) and come up with a scrap of paper suggesting he was in the country before Jan. 1 of this year. Any bank statement, pay stub, or similarly forgeable record will do.

    Expect a mass influx unlike anything this country has seen before, once the 12-month period for accepting Z visa applications begins. These rules are an open invitation to sneak in and present a fraudulent piece of paper indicating that you were already here.

    11. As promised, the bill will legalize most of the 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens now in the country via a new “Z visa.” Each would pay $5,000 - only slightly more than the going rate to be smuggled into America. This is not up front. They will have eight years to pay it back.

    12. Supporters of the bill call the Z visa “temporary” - neglecting to mention that it can be renewed indefinitely until the visa holder dies. Thus, we have the country’s first permanent temporary visa. On top of that, it’s a super-visa - allowing the holder to work, attend college or do just about anything else.

    Are you a law-abiding alien who’s interested in switching to this privileged status? Sorry. Only illegal aliens can qualify.

    13. The bill increases legal migration by at least 50 percent over the next decade by granting green cards to all the remote relatives who are in the chain migration categories, a number estimated at 750,000 to 900,000 a year. That is triple the current number of 250,000. Giving green cards to millions of additional relatives ensures that legal immigration will continue to grow as this larger pool of permanent residents brings in spouses.

    14. The bill claims that bench marks must be met before amnesty/guest-worker provisions go into effect. But the bench marks fail to require that the U.S.-Mexico border be closed, fail to require that the border fence be completed as mandated by Congress in October and fail to require that the Department of Homeland Security implement the entry-exit visa system so Americans can know if visitors and guest workers actually leave.

    The border security part of the bill calls for a 370-mile-long fence on the U.S./Mexico border. That is only half as long as the 700-mile-long fence ordered by the Secure Fence Act passed overwhelmingly by Congress and ostentatiously signed by the president in front of TV cameras just before the November 2006 election.

    15. Another bench mark is that “tools” will be provided to prevent illegal immigrants from getting jobs, including requirements for identification standards and an employee verification system. But the bill lacks a requirement that anybody actually use the tools.

    16. The costs of the Senate immigration bill are mind-boggling. Unbelievably, the Senate has made no attempt to estimate this costs or how to how to pay them. The Heritage Foundation’s Robert Rector puts a potential price tag on this bill of $2.5 trillion, which is five times the cost of the Iraq war.

    17. At least 60 percent of illegal immigrants lack a high school diploma, which means they will work low-wage jobs, pay little or no income tax, and be heavy users of our schools and means-tested social benefits such as Medicaid, school lunches, Women, Infants and Children Program, subsidized housing, the Earned Income Tax Credit, and free legal counsel.

    18. Fiscal costs would go up dramatically after amnesty recipients reach retirement. Each elderly low-skill immigrant imposes a net cost - that is benefits minus taxes - on U.S. taxpayers of about $17,000 per year, according to the Heritage Foundation. These costs would hit Social Security and Medicare at the very time Social Security is expected to go into crisis.

    19. Section 413 calls on Congress to “accelerate the implementation” of the Security and Prosperity Partnership - announced by Bush in Waco, Texas, in 2005 - so that the United States can “improve the standard of living in Mexico.” Do U.S. taxpayers want to take on the awesome economic burden of solving poverty problems in Mexico?

    20. The Senate immigration bill states that the United States want to increase access to credit for “poor and under-served populations in Mexico,” and expand efforts “to reduce the transaction costs of remittance flows” from the U.S. to Mexico now running at $23 billion a year. That is money made in the US but transferred out of our economy.

    21. The Senate bill also puts the United States into a “partnership” with Mexico for “increasing health care access for poor and under-served populations in Mexico,” for “assisting Mexico in increasing its emergency and trauma health care facilities,” and for “expanding prenatal care” in the border region. Do U.S. taxpayers want to take on the awesome economic burden of solving problems in Mexico?

    22. The Senate bill authorizes 4,000 new Border Patrol agents, but doesn’t require that they be trained or deployed.

    23. Illegal Aliens will receive instate tuition. Illegal aliens would receive a taxpayer subsidy worth tens of thousands of dollars and would be treated better than U.S. citizens from out of state, who must pay three to four times as much to attend college. In an era of limited educational resources and rising tuitions, U.S. citizens, not aliens openly violating federal law, should be first in line to receive education subsidies.

    24.Health standards ignored – Z-Visa holders are not required to be given medical examinations and immunizations. Z-Visa applicants and permenant residents are two peas off the same pod. Both can live in the USA as long as they want. Permenant residents are required to be given a medical examination and immunized but Z-Visa holders are not. All aliens, including Z-Visa holders should be required to be given medical examinations and immunized. They are living and breathing in our country just as permanent residents. The health and safety issues are one and the same. TB or Leprosy anyone?

    25.“There are no serious assimilation components to the legislation.” Dual citizenship, naturalized Americans voting here and overseas, non-English classrooms and multilingual ballots all thrive, despite the bill’s “comprehensive” scope. “Assimilation” appears only once in this legislation.

    26. The amnestee doesn’t have to know squat in English to get probationary status or a Z visa. After four years when seeking to renew the Z visa the first time, he only has to take — not pass, just take — the naturalization language test or be on a waiting list for English classes. “Learn English” only happens after eight years, and then it’s not actual mastery of the language.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  7. #187
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,682

    Re: The Senate's "Grand Bargain" [Immigration Debate]

    ^^Thats what I mean Scooter. Come on. Our stupid Senators just gonna avoid the hard work in vetting a bill and just go away from discussion?
    Good to know some are saying "not so fast....not so fast"

    Dont we deserve a complete discussion? To be informed what exactly this means?
    And Bush can just shut his yap with this.
    I want to know what the bill does exactly.
    Im not trying to make friends with everyone.
    As if this is gonna make things all nice with the opposition.

  8. #188
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,280

    Re: The Senate's "Grand Bargain" [Immigration Debate]

    Exactly... at the very least I think immigration should be handled like a 12 step program... not all at once. And STEP #1 absolutely.. positively needs to be border security. Without it the rest of this bill is not worth the paper it is printed on. We do not want more empty promises.. show us you can/have secured the borders.. then... and only then.. am I going to be willing to discuss ANY of the rest.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  9. #189
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,682

    Re: The Senate's "Grand Bargain" [Immigration Debate]

    Quote Originally Posted by AMDScooter View Post
    Exactly... at the very least I think immigration should be handled like a 12 step program... not all at once. And STEP #1 absolutely.. positively needs to be border security. Without it the rest of this bill is not worth the paper it is printed on. We do not want more empty promises.. show us you can/have secured the borders.. then... and only then.. am I going to be willing to discuss ANY of the rest.
    Agree. And dispite what anyone may think on the position I know neither one of us is heartless. I recall the conversations going back when both of us sorta squirmed at the notion of frightening little kids that are left stranded due to some "raid"
    The problem needs to be stopped at the border.
    Then we can find ways to solve the rest.
    Just like fixing a plumbing leak. Turn off the main and take a hard look.

  10. #190
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,280

    Re: The Senate's "Grand Bargain" [Immigration Debate]

    Quote Originally Posted by jimzinsocal View Post
    Agree. And dispite what anyone may think on the position I know neither one of us is heartless. I recall the conversations going back when both of us sorta squirmed at the notion of frightening little kids that are left stranded due to some "raid"
    The problem needs to be stopped at the border.
    Then we can find ways to solve the rest.
    Just like fixing a plumbing leak. Turn off the main and take a hard look.
    Splitting families sucks.. but it is a reality if we want enforcement. If your parents broke the law to get here there HAS to be consequences. And the concept of "anchor kids" strikes me about the same as "welfare mom's" who produce offspring like a Pez dispenser to stay on the dole. They knew there would be risks and they accepted them when they crossed the border illegally. It sounds cold as hell... I know. But breaking the law should NEVER be rewarded.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  11. #191
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,682

    Re: The Senate's "Grand Bargain" [Immigration Debate]

    ^^^And Im just kidding around. Its a tough one. Just nead a breather from how tough it all is.



    You're a mean one, Mr. Grinch.
    You really are a heel.
    You're as cuddly as a cactus,
    You're as charming as an eel.
    Mr. Grinch.


    You're a bad banana
    With a greasy black peel.


    You're a monster, Mr. Grinch.
    Your heart's an empty hole.
    Your brain is full of spiders,
    You've got garlic in your soul.
    Mr. Grinch.


    I wouldn't touch you, with a
    thirty-nine-and-a-half foot pole.


    You're a vile one, Mr. Grinch.
    You have termites in your smile.
    You have all the tender sweetness
    Of a seasick crocodile.
    Mr. Grinch.


    Given the choice between the two of you
    I'd take the seasick crockodile.


    You're a foul one, Mr. Grinch.
    You're a nasty, wasty skunk.
    Your heart is full of unwashed socks
    Your soul is full of gunk.
    Mr. Grinch.


    The three words that best describe you,
    are, and I quote: "Stink. Stank. Stunk."


    You're a rotter, Mr. Grinch.
    You're the king of sinful sots.
    Your heart's a dead tomato splot
    With moldy purple spots,
    Mr. Grinch.


    Your soul is an apalling dump heap overflowing
    with the most disgraceful assortment of deplorable
    rubbish imaginable,
    Mangled up in tangled up knots.


    You nauseate me, Mr. Grinch.
    With a nauseaus super-naus.
    You're a crooked jerky jockey
    And you drive a crooked horse.
    Mr. Grinch.


    You're a three decker saurkraut and toadstool
    sandwich
    With arsenic sauce.
    Last edited by jimzinsocal; 06-01-2007 at 04:39 PM.

  12. #192
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,682

    Re: The Senate's "Grand Bargain" [Immigration Debate]

    Bitchslap

    http://www2.nationalreview.com/dest/.../01/chavez.mp3

    Too funny. Ms Mexican cant speak spanish but the honkey woman is fluent
    Last edited by jimzinsocal; 06-01-2007 at 05:23 PM.

  13. #193
    Joined
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,159

    Re: The Senate's "Grand Bargain" [Immigration Debate]

    jimz ...dude thank you for that. I needed to hear that. wow i think that somebody gifted in leet speak needs to come up with a new word for that kind of ass whippin.

  14. #194
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,682

    Re: The Senate's "Grand Bargain" [Immigration Debate]

    Like that? Good.

  15. #195
    Joined
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,159

    Re: The Senate's "Grand Bargain" [Immigration Debate]

    I have a question how does a gov deport 12 million illegals without becoming oppressive.... Seriously we gonna create nazi style ghettos? Like other "ideas" it sounds nice but in practice i think you lose the Ideal via the method.

    Of course the border should be secured first and foremost.

    But seriously how would deporting 12 million people work?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •