• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you prefer Border Control or Amnesty for illegals

If Bush said that, he was wrong. It is nothing to do with isolationism.

Just to show that I'm not talking out of my ass.

George Bush says Tea Party suffers from "Nativism" | Crooks and Liars

Ingraham: Last November President Bush remarked that the Tea Party is good for the country. But why did he attack a key priority for many Tea Partiers, namely, getting our borders under control and preventing mass amnesty for illegal immigrants?


Bush: What's interesting about our country, if you study history, is that there are some 'isms' that occasionally pop up -- pop up. One is isolationism and its evil twin protectionism and its evil triplet nativism. So if you study the '20s, for example, there was -- there was an American first policy that said who cares what happens in Europe?...And there was an immigration policy that I think during this period argued we had too many Jews and too many Italians; therefore we should have no immigrants. And my point is that we've been through this kind of period of isolationism, protectionism and Nativism. I'm a little concerned that we may be going through the same period."

and no, it's not isolationism.
 
Just to show that I'm not talking out of my ass.

George Bush says Tea Party suffers from "Nativism" | Crooks and Liars

and no, it's not isolationism.

I'm beginning to think the poor man is back on the sauce again. Not wanting illegal immigration is neither isolationism nor nativism. Depending on our economy, legal immigration should be encouraged. A guest worker program should be utilized for highly special situations. Neither legal immigation nor a guest worker program is isolationist or nativist. Please tell President Bush that I believe he is sadly mistaken.
 
I lived in Arizona for over 50 years. What we have right now is working. Our law enforcement gets to brag about what it’s doing but effectively gets nothing effective done. The Republicans get to have illegals as in issue. And the businesses get to have all the low paid illegal workers they want. Ineffective laws are proposed and sometimes passed to good political effect but without screwing anything up for businesses. What the heck is the problem with this? It’s not going to change with businesses running things in Joe Arpaio’s town. Got it? Now quit complaining.
 
I want strict border control and nothing even remotely resembling amnesty for anyone, ever. You break our most basic laws, you don't deserve to be here, period.

Then do you support the automatic Cuban amnesty law as well then?
 
Amnesty. Make getting a visa easier and easier to immigrate into the country and get them in the tax payer system...
Plus most immigrants have a "right of return".

This is what I would call treason. You are aligning yourself with the interests of foreigners over those of the US and over the interests of America's net tax-paying class. You want to burden that class with an even greater number of people that they have to subsidize.

Having a redistribution debate which is focused only on the interests of American citizens is one type of debate but to purposely agitate to exacerbate that debate by aligning yourself with the interests of foreigners is really crossing the line.
 
No to amnesty. I was all for it in the '80's, when Reagan granted amnesty to 2 million aliens in the USA. The result was an immediate surge of illegal crossings at an unprecedented level. Now there are over 20 million+ here, and the economic cost is enormous, around 20 Billion annually in California alone.

My thing is this: Nearly every country on the planet has immigration laws and secures their borders. America has immigration laws. Why the hell aren't we enforcing them? (I know why, but if I go into that this will turn into a tl;dr borefest) Why is America considered the bad guy for trying to secure its borders, just like the rest of the world? Besides the fact that we do a piss-poor job of it, and the little matter that there are 8,000 freaking miles of border to secure.

Uh-uh, no more amnesty. I want the borders secured, illegals who are found deported and every business that employs illegals fined until the cost is 100 times greater than the exploitation of cheap labor would save. There's no excuse for employers not to know their employees immigration status. There's a free .gov website that any employer can access that will instantly detect false green card and social security numbers.

Totally agree! BTW, you know I love Obama but if he does not win in this next election? He is gonna write and grant amnesty for anybody illegal here on his way out.. Watch and see.
 
Last edited:
This is what I would call treason. You are aligning yourself with the interests of foreigners over those of the US and over the interests of America's net tax-paying class. You want to burden that class with an even greater number of people that they have to subsidize.

Having a redistribution debate which is focused only on the interests of American citizens is one type of debate but to purposely agitate to exacerbate that debate by aligning yourself with the interests of foreigners is really crossing the line.

You have got to be kidding me....
 
The either or approach is simple minded. Both...and then some. Step 1, close the borders. Step 2, give everyone here 30 days to go home or we legalize them. Step 3, ensure everyone that IS here has a valid SSN and make a red/green light SSN verification available and mandatory. Step 4, no under the table off the books employment. Step 5, fines and jail for employers that hire people illegaly. Step 6, work with Mexico to establish preferred trade status, equitable employment rules, similar currency values, etc. Invest the money that would be spent over 10 years in tracking down, jailing, trying and transporting illegals in better trade schools and industrial opportunities. Legalize marijuana. Build bigger and better supermax facilities and not be afraid to fill them.

Just closing the border is unrealistic and wont work. Just offering amnesty is simple minded and every 10 years or so we would face the same problem. Current state, we have about 20-30 illegal immigrants here and MOST of them are working. How many jobs have been lost and how large a dent would 20-30 million jobs make in the national employment picture?
 
Totally agree! BTW, you know I love Obama but if he does not win in this next election? He is gonna write and grant amnesty for anybody illegal here on his way out.. Watch and see.
Im betting you see it before the election...he needs the votes.
 
This is what I would call treason. You are aligning yourself with the interests of foreigners over those of the US and over the interests of America's net tax-paying class.

Actually, it isn't treason when you think about it as aligning yourself in with the interests of changing foreigners into Americans, which is in the interest of the US. My own father is an example of just such a former foreigner.
 
Do you prefer Border Control or Amnesty for illegals

neither
border control should only be a mechanism for sorting out terrorists
otherwise, let in all comers
we want them to spend their money here
that helps the economy and partially offsets the balance of trade deficit

but unless they have followed our laws, they are ineligible for any employment
the present laws are adequate but are not enforced
we can help by incentivizing the reporting of illegal workers
whatever hefty fine the employer is required to pay because he hired an illegal goes to the person who reported the illegal hire
it will become a cottage industry
and overnight, the illegals will be off of the payrolls

and the illegals must be denied ANY government assistance
no drivers licenses
no bank accounts without a drivers license/ID
no school for the kids without a drivers license/ID
no (government funded) health care without the ID [the only exception being where the patient's life would be in immediate danger without medical attention]
no housing assistance without the ID
no food stamps without the ID
no business licenses without the ID

in short, without having a means to live illegally in the USA, the illegals will solve our problem for us
that whoosh sound you will hear is the convoy of illegals taking themselves south of the border
 
Do you prefer Border Control or Amnesty for illegals

neither
border control should only be a mechanism for sorting out terrorists
otherwise, let in all comers
we want them to spend their money herethat helps the economy and partially offsets the balance of trade deficit
Thats some seriously funny stuff right there! YES...indeed...THAT is why they are sneaking into the country...not for under the table jobs and to send moeny back to their families in mejico...but for the awesome SHOPPING we have here. :lamo
 
This is a false choice.

If we have a closed border, Mexicans will get here anyway and be 'stuck' here unable to return to Mexico. We should open the border and monitor who comes here.

For them to be stuck here, they'd have to want to leave in the first place.
 
Thats some seriously funny stuff right there! YES...indeed...THAT is why they are sneaking into the country...not for under the table jobs and to send moeny back to their families in mejico...but for the awesome SHOPPING we have here. :lamo

go back and read the whole post, mack


but there are certainly wealthy foreigners who might want to live in the USA without needing to also work here
we should want them to come and spend their money
just not expect to earn a living or enjoy any government benefits
 
go back and read the whole post, mack


but there are certainly wealthy foreigners who might want to live in the USA without needing to also work here
we should want them to come and spend their money
just not expect to earn a living or enjoy any government benefits
Come on Bubba...you are killing me here. Those wealthy foreigners...THEY are the ones sneaking into this country? :lamo
 
Inforce the laws on gthe books anf they will go back home and stop trying to turn America into the crap hole they left.

Anyone who wants to give them Ammesty is Anti-American in my book, and that includes Obama.
 
The poll is stupid for a lot of reason... First, it's a false dichotomy. Amnesty and border control are not mutually exclusive. Second, Rasmussen cleverly phrases it as "regaining control over our borders", which biases the question by misleading respondents into assuming that we have lost control of our borders, which is obviously false. Third, "amnesty" isn't really a meaningful concept. Some people hear that and they think "a program where people who have lived in the US more than 15 years can begin a long difficult process of applying for legal permanent residence", while others think "just handing anybody who knocks on the door citizenship"... Obviously the former is what actual politicians have actually considered in real life and the later is just stupid talk, but since there is soooo much of that particular variety of stupid talk going around, it's safe to assume that many of the respondents assumed that is what was meant by amnesty.

Anyways, it's typical of Rasmussen issue polls. That's why their numbers are always to right leaning. They blatantly manipulate the polls like this every time.
 
Inforce the laws on gthe books anf they will go back home and stop trying to turn America into the crap hole they left.

Anyone who wants to give them Ammesty is Anti-American in my book, and that includes Obama.

Lets start with just enforcing spelling rules and go from there.
 
Which do you favor....Americans by a 2-1 margin prefer border control over Amnesty

Voters Put Border Control Ahead of Amnesty by 2-1 Margin - Rasmussen Reports™

I prefer border control and enforcing any current laws( as well as creating and enforcing any new laws)to crack down on illegals and encourage them to leave. We do not need amnesty and we do not need any mass roundups like they did with operation wetback in 1954 and Mexican repatriation in 1929-1939, states like Oklahoma and Arizona have proved you do not need amnesty and nor do we need mass round ups to get rid of most of the illegals. Amnesty is no solution for cracking down on illegal immigration because it amounts to pouring gas on a fire and expecting it to be put out when in reality all it does is make it worse.
 
Last edited:
Inforce the laws on gthe books anf they will go back home and stop trying to turn America into the crap hole they left.

Anyone who wants to give them Ammesty is Anti-American in my book, and that includes Obama.
Well...then call me unAmerican...but I think it is pure stupidity to think you can create an environment rife FOR abuse, profit FROM said abuse, then be all shocked and amazed THAT it is abused. I also think there is no way you can round up 20-30 million illegals, that if you tried it you would face crippling costs (more so than now), and that if you managed to pull it off you would have full scale race riots and other legal problems. You have to be smarter than the problem to come up with a real solution.

Now...if we can find a way to ship 20-30 million of our deadbeats to the socialist utopia that is mejico...then we would REALLY be on to something.
 
Well...then call me unAmerican...but I think it is pure stupidity to think you can create an environment rife FOR abuse, profit FROM said abuse, then be all shocked and amazed THAT it is abused. I also think there is no way you can round up 20-30 million illegals, that if you tried it you would face crippling costs (more so than now), and that if you managed to pull it off you would have full scale race riots and other legal problems. You have to be smarter than the problem to come up with a real solution.

Now...if we can find a way to ship 20-30 million of our deadbeats to the socialist utopia that is mejico...then we would REALLY be on to something.

You do not need to do another operation Wetback or Mexican Repatriation. All you have to you do is enforce and enact various laws that make it hard has hell for illegals to live and make it hard as hell for someone to aid and house illegals. Oklahoma has done it, so has Arizona and other states are also in the process of doing the same thing.
 
You do not need to do another operation Wetback or Mexican Repatriation. All you have to you do is enforce and enact various laws that make it hard has hell for illegals to live and make it hard as hell for someone to aid and house illegals. Oklahoma has done it, so has Arizona and other states are also in the process of doing the same thing.
I absolutely agree the laws need to be changed regarding the hiring of illegals. But what you are essentially saying is "your honor...we opened the gates, windows and doors, made a bed for them, offered them a seat at our table, asked them to mow our lawn, clean our house, and watch our children and paid them off the books (and a HELL of a lot less than minimum wage) and let them live with us for 30 years. We just dont think its right and they should have to go back home now."
 
Back
Top Bottom