• 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!

Limbaugh: It’s Up To Me And Fox News To Stop Amnesty

mak2 said:
If they could not work when they get here they would not come. Hold the buisness that hire them responsible, the problem would be over in a month or two.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but we both know that there would likely still be loopholes. Instead of putting them on the payroll, they'd just continue paying them under the table unless the law had sizeable teeth. I don't think anything short of immediate and permanent loss of all business licenses would do it.
 
That would be fine with me. The problem would be over. I really think both sides have always wanted immigration exactly like it is. The democrats figure they will vote democrat someday, and the republican (Corporation) want the very cheap labor. The Republicans act like it is all the democrats fault, and keep hiring the cheap labor.
Tigger said:
Agreed, but we both know that there would likely still be loopholes. Instead of putting them on the payroll, they'd just continue paying them under the table unless the law had sizeable teeth. I don't think anything short of immediate and permanent loss of all business licenses would do it.
Click to expand...
 
mak2 said:
If they could not work when they get here they would not come. Hold the buisness that hire them responsible, the problem would be over in a month or two.
Click to expand...

Completely wrong. They're here now and stay for the superior benefits of "not working" in the United States as compared to "not working" in Mexico. Liberals bride them with benefits and they in turn vote for liberals. California spends ten billion of American tax payer money a year to support illegal Mexicans. That money should be used for our own needy people.
 
Exactly what "benefits" do illegal immigrants get? I used to beleive this too. The only "benefit" they get is to be medically stablizied until sent back home. Illegals get NO benefits.
Ray410 said:
Completely wrong. They're here now and stay for the superior benefits of "not working" in the United States as compared to "not working" in Mexico. Liberals bride them with benefits and they in turn vote for liberals. California spends ten billion of American tax payer money a year to support illegal Mexicans. That money should be used for our own needy people.
Click to expand...
 
Tigger said:
The pathway for illegal immigrants should be lined with bullets. Preferably well aimed and of high caliber. That would stop a large portion of the problem. There's always execution as an alternative. :)
Click to expand...

Having read many of your other posts I can only shake my head. No-starters are your forte. Fortunately neither you or anyone in government is willing to shoot men, women and children at the border. Fewer still willing to herd them into gas chambers once they have been here awhile.

But you sure sound tuff on the interwebz, the road to amnesty should be lined with bullets... :roll:
 
mak2 said:
Exactly what "benefits" do illegal immigrants get? I used to beleive this too. The only "benefit" they get is to be medically stablizied until sent back home. Illegals get NO benefits.
Click to expand...

Consider the virtues of living in a cardboard shack on a dirt road next to a garbage dump where you look for food. Do you see any difference now?
 
If they did not have a job up here they would be in exactly the same situation. They get zero benefits here.
Ray410 said:
Consider the virtues of living in a cardboard shack on a dirt road next to a garbage dump where you look for food. Do you see any difference now?
Click to expand...
 
Guy Incognito said:
Yeah it does, IN DICTA! Dicta is not a holding. Time for you to admit you have no clue what you are talking about.
Click to expand...

Jesus.


In his famous Footnote 54, Justice Harry Blackmun wrote:

"When Texas urges that a fetus is entitled to Fourteenth Amendment protection as a person, it faces a dilemma. Neither in Texas nor in any other State are all abortions prohibited. Despite broad proscription, an exception always exists. The exception contained [410 U.S. 113, 158] in Art. 1196, for an abortion procured or attempted by medical advice for the purpose of saving the life of the mother, is typical. But if the fetus is a person who is not to be deprived of life without due process of law, and if the mother's condition is the sole determinant, does not the Texas exception appear to be out of line with the Amendment's command?

There are other inconsistencies between Fourteenth Amendment status and the typical abortion statute. It has already been pointed out, n. 49, supra, that in Texas the woman is not a principal or an accomplice with respect to an abortion upon her. If the fetus is a person, why is the woman not a principal or an accomplice? Further, the penalty for criminal abortion specified by Art. 1195 is significantly less than the maximum penalty for murder prescribed by Art. 1257 of the Texas Penal Code. If the fetus is a person, may the penalties be different?"

This is part of rebutting Texas's claim and hence is the reasoning (not dicta) of the opinion.

Libertarian lawyers! What fun!
 
Ray410 said:
Completely wrong. They're here now and stay for the superior benefits of "not working" in the United States as compared to "not working" in Mexico.....
Click to expand...

Very few illegal immigrants succeed in obtaining all of the fake documents required to obtain welfare or other benefits, except that their kids go to school. When I see probable illegal aliens they are out by the building supply store looking for day jobs or going to work as maids or baby sitters in private homes. I have never seen anyone who looks like a legal resident (that is European or African looking) seeking day jobs. When I see groups of people just hanging out drinking etc. they mostly appear to be legal residents, very few appear to be Hispanic. In my extensive experience, Hispanic immigrants are among the hardest working people in this country.
 
notquiteright said:
Having read many of your other posts I can only shake my head. No-starters are your forte. Fortunately neither you or anyone in government is willing to shoot men, women and children at the border. Fewer still willing to herd them into gas chambers once they have been here awhile.
Click to expand...

You're right that our government would never be willing to do such a thing. It wouldn't look good on tv or when they go to that dinner with the folks from the UN. I mean defending our borders is so passe these days.
 
mak2 said:
Exactly what "benefits" do illegal immigrants get? I used to beleive this too. The only "benefit" they get is to be medically stablizied until sent back home. Illegals get NO benefits.
Click to expand...

It's part of the scapegoating meme. The rightwing noise machine claims illegal workers are getting "welfare" and living high on the hog. In fact most of them pay taxes and get little or no direct government services. The only ones are, as you pointed out ER treatment and their kids can go to public school. It is virtually impossible for a illegal worker to get TANF or any other benefit.

Most studies show that the direct tax costs and revenues with respect to illegals is a wash, or government gets a slight benefit (this doesn't mean there aren't other effects, like wage suppression, but that not the immigrants fault, that's the fault of the large corporations in the agribusiness, hospitality and meat processing industry who knowingly hire them -- they just want to work)

More evidence of the intellectual bankruptcy of the right
 
head of joaquin said:
Jesus.


In his famous Footnote 54, Justice Harry Blackmun wrote:

"When Texas urges that a fetus is entitled to Fourteenth Amendment protection as a person, it faces a dilemma. Neither in Texas nor in any other State are all abortions prohibited. Despite broad proscription, an exception always exists. The exception contained [410 U.S. 113, 158] in Art. 1196, for an abortion procured or attempted by medical advice for the purpose of saving the life of the mother, is typical. But if the fetus is a person who is not to be deprived of life without due process of law, and if the mother's condition is the sole determinant, does not the Texas exception appear to be out of line with the Amendment's command?

There are other inconsistencies between Fourteenth Amendment status and the typical abortion statute. It has already been pointed out, n. 49, supra, that in Texas the woman is not a principal or an accomplice with respect to an abortion upon her. If the fetus is a person, why is the woman not a principal or an accomplice? Further, the penalty for criminal abortion specified by Art. 1195 is significantly less than the maximum penalty for murder prescribed by Art. 1257 of the Texas Penal Code. If the fetus is a person, may the penalties be different?"

This is part of rebutting Texas's claim and hence is the reasoning (not dicta) of the opinion.

Libertarian lawyers! What fun!
Click to expand...

Reasoning that doesn't go to the holding is the same thing as dicta. If it's not a holding, it's dicta. You don't have to be a lawyer to know that.
 
Last edited:
Guy Incognito said:
Reasoning that doesn't go to the holding is the same thing as dicta. If it's not a holding, it's dicta. You don't have to be a lawyer to know that.
Click to expand...

Nope. The holding never includes "reasoning". The holding is the holding. You get to the holding by the reasoning. Dicta is just comments by the court that are not part of the reasoning or the holding, but express the court's thinking on related issues or issues that might arise in the future, as a guidepost.

Try again.

I love libertarian lawyering!
 
mak2 said:
If they did not have a job up here they would be in exactly the same situation. They get zero benefits here.
Click to expand...

Who do you think pays for the highways they use, who pays for the schools they destroy, the hospitals, the police systems, all services? the list goes on endlessly to the detriment of our own. 10 million is a huge number and that is just in California alone.

Every American dollar that they use is taken from an American that is more deserving and needs that money.
 
Wut? The reason they use the highways is to get to work, for one of the buisness men that hires them illegally to keep his labor costs down. I thought we decieded during the last election that buisness built the roads, Americans didnt. They do not destory schools that I know of, please explain. They have no medical benefits here in the US. They are stabilized and returned to Mexico. The police systems? Really I dont understand what you are talking about. Quit reading the right wing blog machine. Look it up, Illegal aliens are not allowed any benefits in US. If they get them it is by fraud and should be deported or imprisoned or both.
Ray410 said:
Who do you think pays for the highways they use, who pays for the schools they destroy, the hospitals, the police systems, all services? the list goes on endlessly to the detriment of our own. 10 million is a huge number and that is just in California alone.

Every American dollar that they use is taken from an American that is more deserving and needs that money.
Click to expand...
 
RLN said:
Rush is on his own. The GOP is starting to smell the coffee with that last election; there is a new voter out there that is different than the one 60 some years ago. :cool:
Click to expand...

Reagan was president less than 60 years ago. Get a grip on your own importance. Obama didn't get 50% of popular vote, so settle down. There is no NEW kind of voter out there, there are too many of the wrong kind of voter out there LIVING IN DENSE POPULATION CENTERS. What kind of voter could they be?


Here's a hint....entitlement.
 
Maybe we should just give "them" 2/3 of a vote, or how bout 1/3, you know, since they are the "wrong kind" of voter in the DENSE POPULATION CENTERS. By the way, what is up with the CAPS? We woudl have caught your meaning without them.
American said:
Reagan was president less than 60 years ago. Get a grip on your own importance. Obama didn't get 50% of popular vote, so settle down. There is no NEW kind of voter out there, there are too many of the wrong kind of voter out there LIVING IN DENSE POPULATION CENTERS. What kind of voter could they be?


Here's a hint....entitlement.
Click to expand...
 
mak2 said:
Wut? The reason they use the highways is to get to work, for one of the buisness men that hires them illegally to keep his labor costs down. I thought we decieded during the last election that buisness built the roads, Americans didnt. They do not destory schools that I know of, please explain. They have no medical benefits here in the US. They are stabilized and returned to Mexico. The police systems? Really I dont understand what you are talking about. Quit reading the right wing blog machine. Look it up, Illegal aliens are not allowed any benefits in US. If they get them it is by fraud and should be deported or imprisoned or both.
Click to expand...

Your rebuttal has moved far away from the realm of reason and entered the fantasy realm of Agenda.
 
Which part? You mean the fact that illegal immigrants get absolutely no benefits legally from the government? Or that the only reason they are here is becuse American buisness pays them. Not agenda, but facts. You can rebutt, but just calling something "fantasy agenda" what ever that means is not really discussion.
Ray410 said:
Your rebuttal has moved far away from the realm of reason and entered the fantasy realm of Agenda.
Click to expand...
 
jonny5 said:
Everytime Rush annoys a liberal, he makes another dollar. Thats why hes a millionaire.
Click to expand...

Maybe once we can get past :lol:ing at him and his brainwashed followers, we can figure exactly where he's annoying us.
 
clownboy said:
I certainly pray you are correct. I've lost faith this country will be anything but a pale reflection of itself by the time my grandchildren have grown. Perhaps enough in congress will grow stones and oppose this, but right now, with the current congress, don't know.
Click to expand...

Seems this congress is about as stony as a congress should get. The last one set a record for both filibusters and fewest pieces of legislation passed. This one looks to be but an ever-so-slight improvement
 
American said:
Reagan was president less than 60 years ago. Get a grip on your own importance. Obama didn't get 50% of popular vote, so settle down. There is no NEW kind of voter out there, there are too many of the wrong kind of voter out there LIVING IN DENSE POPULATION CENTERS. What kind of voter could they be?


Here's a hint....entitlement.
Click to expand...
Really? What's wrong with entitlement?
 
Tigger said:
You're right that our government would never be willing to do such a thing. It wouldn't look good on tv or when they go to that dinner with the folks from the UN. I mean defending our borders is so passe these days.
Click to expand...

You speak of the government as if it is a separate part of the nation, far more accurate is to say the border guards wouldn't carry out a shoot on sight order and the citizens wouldn't tolerate an administration that issued such an order. It is SECURE our border, not kill anyone crossing outside the few checkpoints currently set-up. but yes killing people attempting to cross the border is VERY passe.

You seem to forget a great deal of what you type... how do you execute 11 million people who are already here? Think we want to try and outdo the Germans?

Occy Rush isn't the only person who is great at empty hyperbole and the 'Theater of the Absurd! :2wave:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom