Re: GOP Rallies On Immigration Issue

T

Ted

Guest
On Oct 23, 4:37 pm, Bjorn <was-walmart-gree...@postamerica.net> wrote:
> [This is not exactly news to me, but it's a laugh in the face of these
> posters who contrive these scenerios in which the Reps are not going
> to kick the Dems' butt due to Illegal Immigration. The Democrats BADLY
> needed to abandon their pro-illegals-invasion positions, it would have
> made something strong and more permanent out of the backlash against
> Bush. As it is, they are going to piss it away as fast as possible. I
> will wager right here and now that the Republicans gain back the House
> and Senate and win the Presidency at the end of next year. Simply
> because this IS the wedge issue, it is the margin that makes 51% + for
> whomever takes it up, and the Republican candidates are apparently
> going to do that, even though the GOP party organization remains
> corrupted by business money.]
>
> http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/23/politics/washingtonpost/mai...
>
> GOP Seeks To Rally On Immigration Issue
> Oct. 23, 2007(Washingtonpost.com) This story was written by Jonathan
> Weisman.
>
> When Republican Jim Ogonowski launched his long-shot bid for Congress,
> he prepared for an upbeat campaign in his Democratic, working-class
> district of Massachusetts, based on a winning resume: affable hay
> farmer, former Air Force lieutenant colonel, and brother of an
> American Airlines pilot whose hijacked plane slammed into the World
> Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.
>
> But by last month, although opinion polling showed that he was well
> liked, he was still running 10 points behind Democrat Niki Tsongas
> with just weeks to go before a special election. The campaign needed a
> way to go beyond biography, to persuade Northern Massachusetts to vote
> Republican. They found it in illegal immigration.
>
> On Tuesday, Ogonowski still fell short, but Tsongas's 51 to 45 percent
> victory was a shocker in a district where both John F. Kerry and Al
> Gore took 57 percent of the vote, and where liberal Democratic Rep.
> Martin T. Meehan served comfortably for eight terms. The underwhelming
> victory of the wife of deceased former senator Paul Tsongas has
> rekindled Democratic concerns about an immigration issue they had
> hoped had been put to rest.
>
> "This issue has real implications for the country. It captures all the
> American people's anger and frustration not only with immigration, but
> with the economy," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), chairman of the
> House Democratic Caucus and an architect of the Democratic
> congressional victories of 2006. "It's self-evident. This is a big
> problem."
>
> Republicans, sensing a major vulnerability, have been hammering
> Democrats, forcing Congress to face the question of illegal
> immigration on every bill they can find, from agriculture spending and
> housing assistance to the State Children's Health Insurance Program
> (SCHIP).
>
> House Democrats are so concerned that they have resumed talks on a new
> legislative push, even though the collapse of an immigration deal in
> the Senate this spring has left virtually no chance that a final bill
> can be passed in this Congress.
>
> But even in the early stages of this renewed effort, negotiations have
> only underscored the party's problems. Some Democratic leaders want
> what they call a "mini bill," emphasizing border control, penalties on
> firms that employ illegal immigrants and stronger efforts to deny
> illegal immigrants government benefits. But Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez
> (D-Ill.), the point man on the bill, said he will never accept a
> measure that does not include a pathway to citizenship for the 12
> million undocumented workers in the country.
>
> "I think the Democrats are on the wrong side of this issue, and if
> they continue down this path, they are going to lose a lot of seats,"
> said Matt Wylie, a strategist for the Ogonowski campaign.
>
> The issue has shifted since concerns about illegal immigrants
> triggered angry calls for border fences and deportation two years ago.
> Now, voter anger appears to revolve around the belief that illegal
> immigrants are unfairly consuming government benefits, a fear that
> stems more from economic ncertainty than culture clashes, Democratic
> and Republican pollsters say.
>
> Those concerns are not everywhere. But they are glaring in some of the
> white, working-class districts in Kansas, Indiana, North Carolina and
> New Hampshire that gave the Democrats control of the House last year.
> And they were on clear display in Lowell, Mass.
>
> "Immigration played into the economic issue," said Francis Talty, a
> political science professor at the University of Massachusetts at
> Lowell who followed the Tsongas-Ogonowski contest. "Do you want
> illegal immigrants to get in-state [university] tuition? Do you want
> them to get driver's licenses? Do you want their children to get
> benefits under SCHIP? It was the benefit side that has real resonance,
> not the deportation thing."
>
> A new national poll for National Public Radio, conducted by the
> Democratic polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, and the Republican
> firm Public Opinion Strategies, found that voters are more likely to
> side with Democrats than Republicans on war, taxes and spending, the
> economy, health care and health insurance for children, often by wide
> margins. On immigration, the Republicans hold a 49 to 44 percent lead.
>
> But even that might be deceptively tight, said Glen Bolger, a partner
> with Public Opinion Strategies. In the poll, the GOP position was
> framed as getting control of the border, requiring illegal immigrants
> to reenter the country legally, stopping illegal immigrants from
> getting government benefits and sending illegal immigrants who are
> criminals packing. The Democratic position was, "It is impractical to
> expel 12 million people, but we need tougher controls at the borders,
> tougher penalties on employers who hire illegal immigrants and we
> should bar illegal immigrants from getting most government benefits,
> while allowing the law-abiding immigrants to get on a long path to
> citizenship."
>
> That Democratic message is much tougher than the one most voters are
> hearing, Bolger argued. "They're actually in worse shape than they
> think they are," he said.
>
> Dustin Olson, Ogonowski's campaign manager, said the candidate did not
> intend to make government benefits for illegal immigrants a
> centerpiece of the campaign, but it came up unbidden, again and again.
>
> Internal polling found that Ogonowski's tough stance was winning 60
> percent to 30 percent over the positions articulated by Tsongas, said
> Rob Autry, another Public Opinion Strategies partner who served as
> Ogonowski's pollster. Ogonowski's position on taxes had a narrower, 13
> percentage point lead. Every other issue "was dicey," he said.
>
> Then, just two days before Tuesday's balloting, Tsongas said illegal
> immigrants should each be allowed to get a driver's license. The final
> radio ad of the Ogonowski insurgency intoned, "And now for something
> truly incredible. You already know Niki Tsongas supports amnesty for
> illegal immigrants, but today we learned Niki Tsongas would go even
> further. Tsongas told the Boston Herald she wants to give driver's
> licenes to illegal immigrants."
>
> John Walsh, chairman of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, said the
> final vote proved the limits of the immigration message. The district
> may be less Democratic than the presidential numbers make it appear,
> he cautioned. Republican gubernatorial candidates have carried it
> handily since 1990, until Deval L. Patrick, the current Democratic
> governor, won it with 51 percent of the vote, the same percentage
> Tsongas took.
>
> If Ogonowski's internal polling showed him trailing by 10 points in
> September, his immigration blitz made up only five points, he said.
>
> But in districts where Democrats do not have five points to give,
> those numbers loom large. "For the American people, and therefore all
> of us, it's emerged as the third rail of American politics," Emanuel
> said. "And anyone who doesn't realize that isn't with the American
> people."


Lead by the twerpish Sen. Reid (D-NV) Dems push for the Dream Act
(amnesty for illegal aliens) the Democrats are destroying their
image of being for "the little guy". The
Dems only concern is for votes and to hell
with the future of America. Sadly, the Democrats
are willing to aid and abet the population blasting
illegal alien movement. What about the environmental
destruction caused by population growth?

ted
 
The Dems are under the mistaken impression that they will be getting
votes in the future.
Unfortunately, they are pissing off their base TODAY. They may think
they are on the side of the little guy, but it's a little guy climbing
over the border with a fake ID. Perhaps they should start campaigning
in Mexico.

This Dem will change to Decline to State before the election. I see
poor citizens left out in the cold in favor of foreign nationals. I
see the environment on the border destroyed by hordes of invaders. Los
Angeles is now the identity theft capitol of the nation. Hospitals
overcrowed and closing. Where are the Dems? Encouraging more mooching
by illegals!

I have put all elected officials, city, state and federal that I am A
ONE ISSUE VOTER. I will be checking my list in the ballot booth and
voting against illegal alein enablers.
 
On Oct 24, 6:34 am, Ted <tedor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 23, 4:37 pm, Bjorn <was-walmart-gree...@postamerica.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > [This is not exactly news to me, but it's a laugh in the face of these
> > posters who contrive these scenerios in which the Reps are not going
> > to kick the Dems' butt due to Illegal Immigration. The Democrats BADLY
> > needed to abandon their pro-illegals-invasion positions, it would have
> > made something strong and more permanent out of the backlash against
> > Bush. As it is, they are going to piss it away as fast as possible. I
> > will wager right here and now that the Republicans gain back the House
> > and Senate and win the Presidency at the end of next year. Simply
> > because this IS the wedge issue, it is the margin that makes 51% + for
> > whomever takes it up, and the Republican candidates are apparently
> > going to do that, even though the GOP party organization remains
> > corrupted by business money.]

>
> >http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/23/politics/washingtonpost/mai...

>
> > GOP Seeks To Rally On Immigration Issue
> > Oct. 23, 2007(Washingtonpost.com) This story was written by Jonathan
> > Weisman.

>
> > When Republican Jim Ogonowski launched his long-shot bid for Congress,
> > he prepared for an upbeat campaign in his Democratic, working-class
> > district of Massachusetts, based on a winning resume: affable hay
> > farmer, former Air Force lieutenant colonel, and brother of an
> > American Airlines pilot whose hijacked plane slammed into the World
> > Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.

>
> > But by last month, although opinion polling showed that he was well
> > liked, he was still running 10 points behind Democrat Niki Tsongas
> > with just weeks to go before a special election. The campaign needed a
> > way to go beyond biography, to persuade Northern Massachusetts to vote
> > Republican. They found it in illegal immigration.

>
> > On Tuesday, Ogonowski still fell short, but Tsongas's 51 to 45 percent
> > victory was a shocker in a district where both John F. Kerry and Al
> > Gore took 57 percent of the vote, and where liberal Democratic Rep.
> > Martin T. Meehan served comfortably for eight terms. The underwhelming
> > victory of the wife of deceased former senator Paul Tsongas has
> > rekindled Democratic concerns about an immigration issue they had
> > hoped had been put to rest.

>
> > "This issue has real implications for the country. It captures all the
> > American people's anger and frustration not only with immigration, but
> > with the economy," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), chairman of the
> > House Democratic Caucus and an architect of the Democratic
> > congressional victories of 2006. "It's self-evident. This is a big
> > problem."

>
> > Republicans, sensing a major vulnerability, have been hammering
> > Democrats, forcing Congress to face the question of illegal
> > immigration on every bill they can find, from agriculture spending and
> > housing assistance to the State Children's Health Insurance Program
> > (SCHIP).

>
> > House Democrats are so concerned that they have resumed talks on a new
> > legislative push, even though the collapse of an immigration deal in
> > the Senate this spring has left virtually no chance that a final bill
> > can be passed in this Congress.

>
> > But even in the early stages of this renewed effort, negotiations have
> > only underscored the party's problems. Some Democratic leaders want
> > what they call a "mini bill," emphasizing border control, penalties on
> > firms that employ illegal immigrants and stronger efforts to deny
> > illegal immigrants government benefits. But Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez
> > (D-Ill.), the point man on the bill, said he will never accept a
> > measure that does not include a pathway to citizenship for the 12
> > million undocumented workers in the country.

>
> > "I think the Democrats are on the wrong side of this issue, and if
> > they continue down this path, they are going to lose a lot of seats,"
> > said Matt Wylie, a strategist for the Ogonowski campaign.

>
> > The issue has shifted since concerns about illegal immigrants
> > triggered angry calls for border fences and deportation two years ago.
> > Now, voter anger appears to revolve around the belief that illegal
> > immigrants are unfairly consuming government benefits, a fear that
> > stems more from economic ncertainty than culture clashes, Democratic
> > and Republican pollsters say.

>
> > Those concerns are not everywhere. But they are glaring in some of the
> > white, working-class districts in Kansas, Indiana, North Carolina and
> > New Hampshire that gave the Democrats control of the House last year.
> > And they were on clear display in Lowell, Mass.

>
> > "Immigration played into the economic issue," said Francis Talty, a
> > political science professor at the University of Massachusetts at
> > Lowell who followed the Tsongas-Ogonowski contest. "Do you want
> > illegal immigrants to get in-state [university] tuition? Do you want
> > them to get driver's licenses? Do you want their children to get
> > benefits under SCHIP? It was the benefit side that has real resonance,
> > not the deportation thing."

>
> > A new national poll for National Public Radio, conducted by the
> > Democratic polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, and the Republican
> > firm Public Opinion Strategies, found that voters are more likely to
> > side with Democrats than Republicans on war, taxes and spending, the
> > economy, health care and health insurance for children, often by wide
> > margins. On immigration, the Republicans hold a 49 to 44 percent lead.

>
> > But even that might be deceptively tight, said Glen Bolger, a partner
> > with Public Opinion Strategies. In the poll, the GOP position was
> > framed as getting control of the border, requiring illegal immigrants
> > to reenter the country legally, stopping illegal immigrants from
> > getting government benefits and sending illegal immigrants who are
> > criminals packing. The Democratic position was, "It is impractical to
> > expel 12 million people, but we need tougher controls at the borders,
> > tougher penalties on employers who hire illegal immigrants and we
> > should bar illegal immigrants from getting most government benefits,
> > while allowing the law-abiding immigrants to get on a long path to
> > citizenship."

>
> > That Democratic message is much tougher than the one most voters are
> > hearing, Bolger argued. "They're actually in worse shape than they
> > think they are," he said.

>
> > Dustin Olson, Ogonowski's campaign manager, said the candidate did not
> > intend to make government benefits for illegal immigrants a
> > centerpiece of the campaign, but it came up unbidden, again and again.

>
> > Internal polling found that Ogonowski's tough stance was winning 60
> > percent to 30 percent over the positions articulated by Tsongas, said
> > Rob Autry, another Public Opinion Strategies partner who served as
> > Ogonowski's pollster. Ogonowski's position on taxes had a narrower, 13
> > percentage point lead. Every other issue "was dicey," he said.

>
> > Then, just two days before Tuesday's balloting, Tsongas said illegal
> > immigrants should each be allowed to get a driver's license. The final
> > radio ad of the Ogonowski insurgency intoned, "And now for something
> > truly incredible. You already know Niki Tsongas supports amnesty for
> > illegal immigrants, but today we learned Niki Tsongas would go even
> > further. Tsongas told the Boston Herald she wants to give driver's
> > licenes to illegal immigrants."

>
> > John Walsh, chairman of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, said the
> > final vote proved the limits of the immigration message. The district
> > may be less Democratic than the presidential numbers make it appear,
> > he cautioned. Republican gubernatorial candidates have carried it
> > handily since 1990, until Deval L. Patrick, the current Democratic
> > governor, won it with 51 percent of the vote, the same percentage
> > Tsongas took.

>
> > If Ogonowski's internal polling showed him trailing by 10 points in
> > September, his immigration blitz made up only five points, he said.

>
> > But in districts where Democrats do not have five points to give,
> > those numbers loom large. "For the American people, and therefore all
> > of us, it's emerged as the third rail of American politics," Emanuel
> > said. "And anyone who doesn't realize that isn't with the American
> > people."

>
> Lead by the twerpish Sen. Reid (D-NV) Dems push for the Dream Act
> (amnesty for illegal aliens) the Democrats are destroying their
> image of being for "the little guy". The
> Dems only concern is for votes and to hell
> with the future of America. Sadly, the Democrats
> are willing to aid and abet the population blasting
> illegal alien movement. What about the environmental
> destruction caused by population growth?
>
> ted- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


Senator Durban had the gall to ask, what crime have these children
committed?

Well moron, since you asked, each of the three illegal aliens cowering
in your office today is over 18 and very aware that they are here
illegaly.
Every ****ing one of them should be apprehended and deported and you,
Senator Durbin should be censured for violating the peoples house with
these criminals.

That's right you pompous ass the adults you hid in your office are not
disenfranchised children, they are criminal illegal aliens whose only
entitlement is now and forever should be a humane repatriation to
their country of origin.

Senator DICK Durban must believe that laws only apply to
constituents,those little people.
 
On Oct 24, 6:34 am, Ted <tedor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 23, 4:37 pm, Bjorn <was-walmart-gree...@postamerica.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > [This is not exactly news to me, but it's a laugh in the face of these
> > posters who contrive these scenerios in which the Reps are not going
> > to kick the Dems' butt due to Illegal Immigration. The Democrats BADLY
> > needed to abandon their pro-illegals-invasion positions, it would have
> > made something strong and more permanent out of the backlash against
> > Bush. As it is, they are going to piss it away as fast as possible. I
> > will wager right here and now that the Republicans gain back the House
> > and Senate and win the Presidency at the end of next year. Simply
> > because this IS the wedge issue, it is the margin that makes 51% + for
> > whomever takes it up, and the Republican candidates are apparently
> > going to do that, even though the GOP party organization remains
> > corrupted by business money.]

>
> >http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/23/politics/washingtonpost/mai...

>
> > GOP Seeks To Rally On Immigration Issue
> > Oct. 23, 2007(Washingtonpost.com) This story was written by Jonathan
> > Weisman.

>
> > When Republican Jim Ogonowski launched his long-shot bid for Congress,
> > he prepared for an upbeat campaign in his Democratic, working-class
> > district of Massachusetts, based on a winning resume: affable hay
> > farmer, former Air Force lieutenant colonel, and brother of an
> > American Airlines pilot whose hijacked plane slammed into the World
> > Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.

>
> > But by last month, although opinion polling showed that he was well
> > liked, he was still running 10 points behind Democrat Niki Tsongas
> > with just weeks to go before a special election. The campaign needed a
> > way to go beyond biography, to persuade Northern Massachusetts to vote
> > Republican. They found it in illegal immigration.

>
> > On Tuesday, Ogonowski still fell short, but Tsongas's 51 to 45 percent
> > victory was a shocker in a district where both John F. Kerry and Al
> > Gore took 57 percent of the vote, and where liberal Democratic Rep.
> > Martin T. Meehan served comfortably for eight terms. The underwhelming
> > victory of the wife of deceased former senator Paul Tsongas has
> > rekindled Democratic concerns about an immigration issue they had
> > hoped had been put to rest.

>
> > "This issue has real implications for the country. It captures all the
> > American people's anger and frustration not only with immigration, but
> > with the economy," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), chairman of the
> > House Democratic Caucus and an architect of the Democratic
> > congressional victories of 2006. "It's self-evident. This is a big
> > problem."

>
> > Republicans, sensing a major vulnerability, have been hammering
> > Democrats, forcing Congress to face the question of illegal
> > immigration on every bill they can find, from agriculture spending and
> > housing assistance to the State Children's Health Insurance Program
> > (SCHIP).

>
> > House Democrats are so concerned that they have resumed talks on a new
> > legislative push, even though the collapse of an immigration deal in
> > the Senate this spring has left virtually no chance that a final bill
> > can be passed in this Congress.

>
> > But even in the early stages of this renewed effort, negotiations have
> > only underscored the party's problems. Some Democratic leaders want
> > what they call a "mini bill," emphasizing border control, penalties on
> > firms that employ illegal immigrants and stronger efforts to deny
> > illegal immigrants government benefits. But Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez
> > (D-Ill.), the point man on the bill, said he will never accept a
> > measure that does not include a pathway to citizenship for the 12
> > million undocumented workers in the country.

>
> > "I think the Democrats are on the wrong side of this issue, and if
> > they continue down this path, they are going to lose a lot of seats,"
> > said Matt Wylie, a strategist for the Ogonowski campaign.

>
> > The issue has shifted since concerns about illegal immigrants
> > triggered angry calls for border fences and deportation two years ago.
> > Now, voter anger appears to revolve around the belief that illegal
> > immigrants are unfairly consuming government benefits, a fear that
> > stems more from economic ncertainty than culture clashes, Democratic
> > and Republican pollsters say.

>
> > Those concerns are not everywhere. But they are glaring in some of the
> > white, working-class districts in Kansas, Indiana, North Carolina and
> > New Hampshire that gave the Democrats control of the House last year.
> > And they were on clear display in Lowell, Mass.

>
> > "Immigration played into the economic issue," said Francis Talty, a
> > political science professor at the University of Massachusetts at
> > Lowell who followed the Tsongas-Ogonowski contest. "Do you want
> > illegal immigrants to get in-state [university] tuition? Do you want
> > them to get driver's licenses? Do you want their children to get
> > benefits under SCHIP? It was the benefit side that has real resonance,
> > not the deportation thing."

>
> > A new national poll for National Public Radio, conducted by the
> > Democratic polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, and the Republican
> > firm Public Opinion Strategies, found that voters are more likely to
> > side with Democrats than Republicans on war, taxes and spending, the
> > economy, health care and health insurance for children, often by wide
> > margins. On immigration, the Republicans hold a 49 to 44 percent lead.

>
> > But even that might be deceptively tight, said Glen Bolger, a partner
> > with Public Opinion Strategies. In the poll, the GOP position was
> > framed as getting control of the border, requiring illegal immigrants
> > to reenter the country legally, stopping illegal immigrants from
> > getting government benefits and sending illegal immigrants who are
> > criminals packing. The Democratic position was, "It is impractical to
> > expel 12 million people, but we need tougher controls at the borders,
> > tougher penalties on employers who hire illegal immigrants and we
> > should bar illegal immigrants from getting most government benefits,
> > while allowing the law-abiding immigrants to get on a long path to
> > citizenship."

>
> > That Democratic message is much tougher than the one most voters are
> > hearing, Bolger argued. "They're actually in worse shape than they
> > think they are," he said.

>
> > Dustin Olson, Ogonowski's campaign manager, said the candidate did not
> > intend to make government benefits for illegal immigrants a
> > centerpiece of the campaign, but it came up unbidden, again and again.

>
> > Internal polling found that Ogonowski's tough stance was winning 60
> > percent to 30 percent over the positions articulated by Tsongas, said
> > Rob Autry, another Public Opinion Strategies partner who served as
> > Ogonowski's pollster. Ogonowski's position on taxes had a narrower, 13
> > percentage point lead. Every other issue "was dicey," he said.

>
> > Then, just two days before Tuesday's balloting, Tsongas said illegal
> > immigrants should each be allowed to get a driver's license. The final
> > radio ad of the Ogonowski insurgency intoned, "And now for something
> > truly incredible. You already know Niki Tsongas supports amnesty for
> > illegal immigrants, but today we learned Niki Tsongas would go even
> > further. Tsongas told the Boston Herald she wants to give driver's
> > licenes to illegal immigrants."

>
> > John Walsh, chairman of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, said the
> > final vote proved the limits of the immigration message. The district
> > may be less Democratic than the presidential numbers make it appear,
> > he cautioned. Republican gubernatorial candidates have carried it
> > handily since 1990, until Deval L. Patrick, the current Democratic
> > governor, won it with 51 percent of the vote, the same percentage
> > Tsongas took.

>
> > If Ogonowski's internal polling showed him trailing by 10 points in
> > September, his immigration blitz made up only five points, he said.

>
> > But in districts where Democrats do not have five points to give,
> > those numbers loom large. "For the American people, and therefore all
> > of us, it's emerged as the third rail of American politics," Emanuel
> > said. "And anyone who doesn't realize that isn't with the American
> > people."

>
> Lead by the twerpish Sen. Reid (D-NV) Dems push for the Dream Act
> (amnesty for illegal aliens) the Democrats are destroying their
> image of being for "the little guy". The
> Dems only concern is for votes and to hell
> with the future of America. Sadly, the Democrats
> are willing to aid and abet the population blasting
> illegal alien movement. What about the environmental
> destruction caused by population growth?
>
> ted- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


What are Americans to do if this legislation passes?

Most city protective services,teaching positions, health, and human
services jobs, will be given to those that are bi-lingual.

within a couple of years bank loan officers, real estate agents, and
insurance agents, will all need to be fluent in Spanish.

I hope you socialists enjoy poverty,

Of course area chambers will be just giddy as the influx of cheap
labor will guarantee pay rates lower by about a half.

If DHS ICE has anything to do with todays shindig, we may as well
all start learning too speak Spanish now.

I waited on hold 5 minutes, was disconnected then waited 10 min for
responder 145 to take my report. Three illegal aliens are being
smuggled into the US Senate building, to which she (responder 145)
asked "why is this a problem." ...uh hello you ****ing moron, it is
against the law. The illegal aliens are in:


"the country illegally, Democrats plan to introduce Tam Tran, a 24-
year old Vietnamese graduate student, Marie Gonzalez, a 21-year old
Costa Rica college student, and Manuel Bartsch, a college sophomore
from Germany. All three young adults, who will be introduced at an
afternoon press briefing, have been in the United States for years,
but their parents entered the country illegally." (CBS News.) Oct.23
2007


We will not even try to figure how many Senators broke the law aiding
and abetting these scofflaws
"crimes, we do'an C no stinkin crimes,." Well not so as you could
tell,
speaking to DHS ICE.


Here is their number if you wish to explain that a criminal act is
going to occur at the US Senate building in Washington D.C. maybe you
will have better luck than I did.


DHS-ICE
1-866-347-2423
 
On Oct 24, 4:34 am, Ted <tedor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 23, 4:37 pm, Bjorn <was-walmart-gree...@postamerica.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > [This is not exactly news to me, but it's a laugh in the face of these
> > posters who contrive these scenerios in which the Reps are not going
> > to kick the Dems' butt due toIllegalImmigration. The Democrats BADLY
> > needed to abandon their pro-illegals-invasion positions, it would have
> > made something strong and more permanent out of the backlash against
> > Bush. As it is, they are going to piss it away as fast as possible. I
> > will wager right here and now that the Republicans gain back the House
> > and Senate and win the Presidency at the end of next year. Simply
> > because this IS the wedge issue, it is the margin that makes 51% + for
> > whomever takes it up, and the Republican candidates are apparently
> > going to do that, even though the GOP party organization remains
> > corrupted by business money.]

>
> >http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/23/politics/washingtonpost/mai...

>
> > GOP Seeks To Rally OnImmigrationIssue
> > Oct. 23, 2007(Washingtonpost.com) This story was written by Jonathan
> > Weisman.

>
> > When Republican Jim Ogonowski launched his long-shot bid for Congress,
> > he prepared for an upbeat campaign in his Democratic, working-class
> > district of Massachusetts, based on a winning resume: affable hay
> > farmer, former Air Force lieutenant colonel, and brother of an
> > American Airlines pilot whose hijacked plane slammed into the World
> > Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.

>
> > But by last month, although opinion polling showed that he was well
> > liked, he was still running 10 points behind Democrat Niki Tsongas
> > with just weeks to go before a special election. The campaign needed a
> > way to go beyond biography, to persuade Northern Massachusetts to vote
> > Republican. They found it inillegalimmigration.

>
> > On Tuesday, Ogonowski still fell short, but Tsongas's 51 to 45 percent
> > victory was a shocker in a district where both John F. Kerry and Al
> > Gore took 57 percent of the vote, and where liberal Democratic Rep.
> > Martin T. Meehan served comfortably for eight terms. The underwhelming
> > victory of the wife of deceased former senator Paul Tsongas has
> > rekindled Democratic concerns about animmigrationissue they had
> > hoped had been put to rest.

>
> > "This issue has real implications for the country. It captures all the
> > American people's anger and frustration not only withimmigration, but
> > with the economy," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), chairman of the
> > House Democratic Caucus and an architect of the Democratic
> > congressional victories of 2006. "It's self-evident. This is a big
> > problem."

>
> > Republicans, sensing a major vulnerability, have been hammering
> > Democrats, forcing Congress to face the question ofillegal
> >immigrationon every bill they can find, from agriculture spending and
> > housing assistance to the State Children's Health Insurance Program
> > (SCHIP).

>
> > House Democrats are so concerned that they have resumed talks on a new
> > legislative push, even though the collapse of animmigrationdeal in
> > the Senate this spring has left virtually no chance that a final bill
> > can be passed in this Congress.

>
> > But even in the early stages of this renewed effort, negotiations have
> > only underscored the party's problems. Some Democratic leaders want
> > what they call a "mini bill," emphasizing border control, penalties on
> > firms that employillegalimmigrants and stronger efforts to deny
> >illegalimmigrants government benefits. But Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez
> > (D-Ill.), the point man on the bill, said he will never accept a
> > measure that does not include a pathway to citizenship for the 12
> > million undocumented workers in the country.

>
> > "I think the Democrats are on the wrong side of this issue, and if
> > they continue down this path, they are going to lose a lot of seats,"
> > said Matt Wylie, a strategist for the Ogonowski campaign.

>
> > The issue has shifted since concerns aboutillegalimmigrants
> > triggered angry calls for border fences and deportation two years ago.
> > Now, voter anger appears to revolve around the belief thatillegal
> > immigrants are unfairly consuming government benefits, a fear that
> > stems more from economic ncertainty than culture clashes, Democratic
> > and Republican pollsters say.

>
> > Those concerns are not everywhere. But they are glaring in some of the
> > white, working-class districts in Kansas, Indiana, North Carolina and
> > New Hampshire that gave the Democrats control of the House last year.
> > And they were on clear display in Lowell, Mass.

>
> > "Immigrationplayed into the economic issue," said Francis Talty, a
> > political science professor at the University of Massachusetts at
> > Lowell who followed the Tsongas-Ogonowski contest. "Do you want
> >illegalimmigrants to get in-state [university] tuition? Do you want
> > them to get driver's licenses? Do you want their children to get
> > benefits under SCHIP? It was the benefit side that has real resonance,
> > not the deportation thing."

>
> > A new national poll for National Public Radio, conducted by the
> > Democratic polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, and the Republican
> > firm Public Opinion Strategies, found that voters are more likely to
> > side with Democrats than Republicans on war, taxes and spending, the
> > economy, health care and health insurance for children, often by wide
> > margins. Onimmigration, the Republicans hold a 49 to 44 percent lead.

>
> > But even that might be deceptively tight, said Glen Bolger, a partner
> > with Public Opinion Strategies. In the poll, the GOP position was
> > framed as getting control of the border, requiringillegalimmigrants
> > to reenter the country legally, stoppingillegalimmigrants from
> > getting government benefits and sendingillegalimmigrants who are
> > criminals packing. The Democratic position was, "It is impractical to
> > expel 12 million people, but we need tougher controls at the borders,
> > tougher penalties on employers who hireillegalimmigrants and we
> > should barillegalimmigrants from getting most government benefits,
> > while allowing the law-abiding immigrants to get on a long path to
> > citizenship."

>
> > That Democratic message is much tougher than the one most voters are
> > hearing, Bolger argued. "They're actually in worse shape than they
> > think they are," he said.

>
> > Dustin Olson, Ogonowski's campaign manager, said the candidate did not
> > intend to make government benefits forillegalimmigrants a
> > centerpiece of the campaign, but it came up unbidden, again and again.

>
> > Internal polling found that Ogonowski's tough stance was winning 60
> > percent to 30 percent over the positions articulated by Tsongas, said
> > Rob Autry, another Public Opinion Strategies partner who served as
> > Ogonowski's pollster. Ogonowski's position on taxes had a narrower, 13
> > percentage point lead. Every other issue "was dicey," he said.

>
> > Then, just two days before Tuesday's balloting, Tsongas saidillegal
> > immigrants should each be allowed to get a driver's license. The final
> > radio ad of the Ogonowski insurgency intoned, "And now for something
> > truly incredible. You already know Niki Tsongas supports amnesty for
> >illegalimmigrants, but today we learned Niki Tsongas would go even
> > further. Tsongas told the Boston Herald she wants to give driver's
> > licenes toillegalimmigrants."

>
> > John Walsh, chairman of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, said the
> > final vote proved the limits of theimmigrationmessage. The district
> > may be less Democratic than the presidential numbers make it appear,
> > he cautioned. Republican gubernatorial candidates have carried it
> > handily since 1990, until Deval L. Patrick, the current Democratic
> > governor, won it with 51 percent of the vote, the same percentage
> > Tsongas took.

>
> > If Ogonowski's internal polling showed him trailing by 10 points in
> > September, hisimmigrationblitz made up only five points, he said.

>
> > But in districts where Democrats do not have five points to give,
> > those numbers loom large. "For the American people, and therefore all
> > of us, it's emerged as the third rail of American politics," Emanuel
> > said. "And anyone who doesn't realize that isn't with the American
> > people."

>
> Lead by the twerpish Sen. Reid (D-NV) Dems push for the Dream Act
> (amnesty forillegalaliens) the Democrats are destroying their
> image of being for "the little guy". The
> Dems only concern is for votes and to hell
> with the future of America. Sadly, the Democrats
> are willing to aid and abet the population blastingillegalalien movement. What about the environmental
> destruction caused by population growth?
>
> ted- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


The DEM's are no longer for the little guy....They are strickly for
"THEMSELVES". "I'm getting mine, screw you," is their theme now that
they are in power. They want to stay in power making all of the money
they can at our expense......
If they get 'Amnesty' for the ILLEGALS , they get votes (forever)....
and with that they make money (forever) from lobbyists who pay them
their
$ 14,900. every three months.( Nearly $ 60,000 extra above their
salary of 160,000 per year, nice huh ?)

Politics suck for the constituency...!!!!

We elected them to "represent us" and they are totally ignoring
us.......

Its past time to "VOTE OUT DEMO's " regardless of what Party you are
from.
We voted out the Repub's when they were in charge, and they learned a
very sound lesson, now its time to teach it to the DEMP's.

VOTE out the "DEMO incumbents"....!!!!
The new party will be called "THE ANERICAN PARTY" and its totally, and
all (for) the Citizens of USA...!!!
 
On Oct 27, 12:29 am, Bigjer <Bigjer...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 24, 4:34 am, Ted <tedor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 23, 4:37 pm, Bjorn <was-walmart-gree...@postamerica.net> wrote:

>
> > > [This is not exactly news to me, but it's a laugh in the face of these
> > > posters who contrive these scenerios in which the Reps are not going
> > > to kick the Dems' butt due toIllegalImmigration. The Democrats BADLY
> > > needed to abandon their pro-illegals-invasion positions, it would have
> > > made something strong and more permanent out of the backlash against
> > > Bush. As it is, they are going to piss it away as fast as possible. I
> > > will wager right here and now that the Republicans gain back the House
> > > and Senate and win the Presidency at the end of next year. Simply
> > > because this IS the wedge issue, it is the margin that makes 51% + for
> > > whomever takes it up, and the Republican candidates are apparently
> > > going to do that, even though the GOP party organization remains
> > > corrupted by business money.]

>
> > >http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/23/politics/washingtonpost/mai....

>
> > > GOP Seeks To Rally OnImmigrationIssue
> > > Oct. 23, 2007(Washingtonpost.com) This story was written by Jonathan
> > > Weisman.

>
> > > When Republican Jim Ogonowski launched his long-shot bid for Congress,
> > > he prepared for an upbeat campaign in his Democratic, working-class
> > > district of Massachusetts, based on a winning resume: affable hay
> > > farmer, former Air Force lieutenant colonel, and brother of an
> > > American Airlines pilot whose hijacked plane slammed into the World
> > > Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.

>
> > > But by last month, although opinion polling showed that he was well
> > > liked, he was still running 10 points behind Democrat Niki Tsongas
> > > with just weeks to go before a special election. The campaign needed a
> > > way to go beyond biography, to persuade Northern Massachusetts to vote
> > > Republican. They found it inillegalimmigration.

>
> > > On Tuesday, Ogonowski still fell short, but Tsongas's 51 to 45 percent
> > > victory was a shocker in a district where both John F. Kerry and Al
> > > Gore took 57 percent of the vote, and where liberal Democratic Rep.
> > > Martin T. Meehan served comfortably for eight terms. The underwhelming
> > > victory of the wife of deceased former senator Paul Tsongas has
> > > rekindled Democratic concerns about animmigrationissue they had
> > > hoped had been put to rest.

>
> > > "This issue has real implications for the country. It captures all the
> > > American people's anger and frustration not only withimmigration, but
> > > with the economy," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), chairman of the
> > > House Democratic Caucus and an architect of the Democratic
> > > congressional victories of 2006. "It's self-evident. This is a big
> > > problem."

>
> > > Republicans, sensing a major vulnerability, have been hammering
> > > Democrats, forcing Congress to face the question ofillegal
> > >immigrationon every bill they can find, from agriculture spending and
> > > housing assistance to the State Children's Health Insurance Program
> > > (SCHIP).

>
> > > House Democrats are so concerned that they have resumed talks on a new
> > > legislative push, even though the collapse of animmigrationdeal in
> > > the Senate this spring has left virtually no chance that a final bill
> > > can be passed in this Congress.

>
> > > But even in the early stages of this renewed effort, negotiations have
> > > only underscored the party's problems. Some Democratic leaders want
> > > what they call a "mini bill," emphasizing border control, penalties on
> > > firms that employillegalimmigrants and stronger efforts to deny
> > >illegalimmigrants government benefits. But Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez
> > > (D-Ill.), the point man on the bill, said he will never accept a
> > > measure that does not include a pathway to citizenship for the 12
> > > million undocumented workers in the country.

>
> > > "I think the Democrats are on the wrong side of this issue, and if
> > > they continue down this path, they are going to lose a lot of seats,"
> > > said Matt Wylie, a strategist for the Ogonowski campaign.

>
> > > The issue has shifted since concerns aboutillegalimmigrants
> > > triggered angry calls for border fences and deportation two years ago.
> > > Now, voter anger appears to revolve around the belief thatillegal
> > > immigrants are unfairly consuming government benefits, a fear that
> > > stems more from economic ncertainty than culture clashes, Democratic
> > > and Republican pollsters say.

>
> > > Those concerns are not everywhere. But they are glaring in some of the
> > > white, working-class districts in Kansas, Indiana, North Carolina and
> > > New Hampshire that gave the Democrats control of the House last year.
> > > And they were on clear display in Lowell, Mass.

>
> > > "Immigrationplayed into the economic issue," said Francis Talty, a
> > > political science professor at the University of Massachusetts at
> > > Lowell who followed the Tsongas-Ogonowski contest. "Do you want
> > >illegalimmigrants to get in-state [university] tuition? Do you want
> > > them to get driver's licenses? Do you want their children to get
> > > benefits under SCHIP? It was the benefit side that has real resonance,
> > > not the deportation thing."

>
> > > A new national poll for National Public Radio, conducted by the
> > > Democratic polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, and the Republican
> > > firm Public Opinion Strategies, found that voters are more likely to
> > > side with Democrats than Republicans on war, taxes and spending, the
> > > economy, health care and health insurance for children, often by wide
> > > margins. Onimmigration, the Republicans hold a 49 to 44 percent lead.

>
> > > But even that might be deceptively tight, said Glen Bolger, a partner
> > > with Public Opinion Strategies. In the poll, the GOP position was
> > > framed as getting control of the border, requiringillegalimmigrants
> > > to reenter the country legally, stoppingillegalimmigrants from
> > > getting government benefits and sendingillegalimmigrants who are
> > > criminals packing. The Democratic position was, "It is impractical to
> > > expel 12 million people, but we need tougher controls at the borders,
> > > tougher penalties on employers who hireillegalimmigrants and we
> > > should barillegalimmigrants from getting most government benefits,
> > > while allowing the law-abiding immigrants to get on a long path to
> > > citizenship."

>
> > > That Democratic message is much tougher than the one most voters are
> > > hearing, Bolger argued. "They're actually in worse shape than they
> > > think they are," he said.

>
> > > Dustin Olson, Ogonowski's campaign manager, said the candidate did not
> > > intend to make government benefits forillegalimmigrants a
> > > centerpiece of the campaign, but it came up unbidden, again and again.

>
> > > Internal polling found that Ogonowski's tough stance was winning 60
> > > percent to 30 percent over the positions articulated by Tsongas, said
> > > Rob Autry, another Public Opinion Strategies partner who served as
> > > Ogonowski's pollster. Ogonowski's position on taxes had a narrower, 13
> > > percentage point lead. Every other issue "was dicey," he said.

>
> > > Then, just two days before Tuesday's balloting, Tsongas saidillegal
> > > immigrants should each be allowed to get a driver's license. The final
> > > radio ad of the Ogonowski insurgency intoned, "And now for something
> > > truly incredible. You already know Niki Tsongas supports amnesty for
> > >illegalimmigrants, but today we learned Niki Tsongas would go even
> > > further. Tsongas told the Boston Herald she wants to give driver's
> > > licenes toillegalimmigrants."

>
> > > John Walsh, chairman of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, said the
> > > final vote proved the limits of theimmigrationmessage. The district
> > > may be less Democratic than the presidential numbers make it appear,
> > > he cautioned. Republican gubernatorial candidates have carried it
> > > handily since 1990, until Deval L. Patrick, the current Democratic
> > > governor, won it with 51 percent of the vote, the same percentage
> > > Tsongas took.

>
> > > If Ogonowski's internal polling showed him trailing by 10 points in
> > > September, hisimmigrationblitz made up only five points, he said.

>
> > > But in districts where Democrats do not have five points to give,
> > > those numbers loom large. "For the American people, and therefore all
> > > of us, it's emerged as the third rail of American politics," Emanuel
> > > said. "And anyone who doesn't realize that isn't with the American
> > > people."

>
> > Lead by the twerpish Sen. Reid (D-NV) Dems push for the Dream Act
> > (amnesty forillegalaliens) the Democrats are destroying their
> > image of being for "the little guy". The
> > Dems only concern is for votes and to hell
> > with the future of America. Sadly, the Democrats
> > are willing to aid and abet the population blastingillegalalien movement. What about the environmental
> > destruction caused by population growth?

>
> > ted- Hide quoted text -

>
> > - Show quoted text -

>
>
> The DEM's are no longer for the little guy....They are strickly for
> "THEMSELVES". "I'm getting mine, screw you," is their theme now that
> they are in power. They want to stay in power making all of the money
> they can at our expense......
> If they get 'Amnesty' for the ILLEGALS , they get votes (forever)....
> and with that they make money (forever) from lobbyists who pay them
> their
> $ 14,900. every three months.( Nearly $ 60,000 extra above their
> salary of 160,000 per year, nice huh ?)
>
> Politics suck for the constituency...!!!!
>
> We elected them to "represent us" and they are totally ignoring
> us.......
>
> Its past time to "VOTE OUT DEMO's " regardless of what Party you are
> from.
> We voted out the Repub's when they were in charge, and they learned a
> very sound lesson, now its time to teach it to the DEMP's.
>
> VOTE out the "DEMO incumbents"....!!!!
> The new party will be called "THE ANERICAN PARTY" and its totally, and
> all (for) the Citizens of USA...!!!
> ...
>
> read more
 
I hear an awful lot of complaints about illegal immigration, and I have yet
to hear anyone with a way to solve the illegal immigration problem. I hear
piecemeal solutions to the problem, which does not solve the problem. I
hear complaints when someone does propose ideas that would go a long way to
greatly reducing the illegal immigration problem, but I do not hear from
anyone a comprehensive solution to solving the illegal immigration problem.
And I am not convinced that the "problem" has a "solution".

"Bigjer" <Bigjer999@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1193424375.800288.266910@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 24, 4:34 am, Ted <tedor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 23, 4:37 pm, Bjorn <was-walmart-gree...@postamerica.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > [This is not exactly news to me, but it's a laugh in the face of these
>> > posters who contrive these scenerios in which the Reps are not going
>> > to kick the Dems' butt due toIllegalImmigration. The Democrats BADLY
>> > needed to abandon their pro-illegals-invasion positions, it would have
>> > made something strong and more permanent out of the backlash against
>> > Bush. As it is, they are going to piss it away as fast as possible. I
>> > will wager right here and now that the Republicans gain back the House
>> > and Senate and win the Presidency at the end of next year. Simply
>> > because this IS the wedge issue, it is the margin that makes 51% + for
>> > whomever takes it up, and the Republican candidates are apparently
>> > going to do that, even though the GOP party organization remains
>> > corrupted by business money.]

>>
>> >http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/23/politics/washingtonpost/mai...

>>
>> > GOP Seeks To Rally OnImmigrationIssue
>> > Oct. 23, 2007(Washingtonpost.com) This story was written by Jonathan
>> > Weisman.

>>
>> > When Republican Jim Ogonowski launched his long-shot bid for Congress,
>> > he prepared for an upbeat campaign in his Democratic, working-class
>> > district of Massachusetts, based on a winning resume: affable hay
>> > farmer, former Air Force lieutenant colonel, and brother of an
>> > American Airlines pilot whose hijacked plane slammed into the World
>> > Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.

>>
>> > But by last month, although opinion polling showed that he was well
>> > liked, he was still running 10 points behind Democrat Niki Tsongas
>> > with just weeks to go before a special election. The campaign needed a
>> > way to go beyond biography, to persuade Northern Massachusetts to vote
>> > Republican. They found it inillegalimmigration.

>>
>> > On Tuesday, Ogonowski still fell short, but Tsongas's 51 to 45 percent
>> > victory was a shocker in a district where both John F. Kerry and Al
>> > Gore took 57 percent of the vote, and where liberal Democratic Rep.
>> > Martin T. Meehan served comfortably for eight terms. The underwhelming
>> > victory of the wife of deceased former senator Paul Tsongas has
>> > rekindled Democratic concerns about animmigrationissue they had
>> > hoped had been put to rest.

>>
>> > "This issue has real implications for the country. It captures all the
>> > American people's anger and frustration not only withimmigration, but
>> > with the economy," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), chairman of the
>> > House Democratic Caucus and an architect of the Democratic
>> > congressional victories of 2006. "It's self-evident. This is a big
>> > problem."

>>
>> > Republicans, sensing a major vulnerability, have been hammering
>> > Democrats, forcing Congress to face the question ofillegal
>> >immigrationon every bill they can find, from agriculture spending and
>> > housing assistance to the State Children's Health Insurance Program
>> > (SCHIP).

>>
>> > House Democrats are so concerned that they have resumed talks on a new
>> > legislative push, even though the collapse of animmigrationdeal in
>> > the Senate this spring has left virtually no chance that a final bill
>> > can be passed in this Congress.

>>
>> > But even in the early stages of this renewed effort, negotiations have
>> > only underscored the party's problems. Some Democratic leaders want
>> > what they call a "mini bill," emphasizing border control, penalties on
>> > firms that employillegalimmigrants and stronger efforts to deny
>> >illegalimmigrants government benefits. But Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez
>> > (D-Ill.), the point man on the bill, said he will never accept a
>> > measure that does not include a pathway to citizenship for the 12
>> > million undocumented workers in the country.

>>
>> > "I think the Democrats are on the wrong side of this issue, and if
>> > they continue down this path, they are going to lose a lot of seats,"
>> > said Matt Wylie, a strategist for the Ogonowski campaign.

>>
>> > The issue has shifted since concerns aboutillegalimmigrants
>> > triggered angry calls for border fences and deportation two years ago.
>> > Now, voter anger appears to revolve around the belief thatillegal
>> > immigrants are unfairly consuming government benefits, a fear that
>> > stems more from economic ncertainty than culture clashes, Democratic
>> > and Republican pollsters say.

>>
>> > Those concerns are not everywhere. But they are glaring in some of the
>> > white, working-class districts in Kansas, Indiana, North Carolina and
>> > New Hampshire that gave the Democrats control of the House last year.
>> > And they were on clear display in Lowell, Mass.

>>
>> > "Immigrationplayed into the economic issue," said Francis Talty, a
>> > political science professor at the University of Massachusetts at
>> > Lowell who followed the Tsongas-Ogonowski contest. "Do you want
>> >illegalimmigrants to get in-state [university] tuition? Do you want
>> > them to get driver's licenses? Do you want their children to get
>> > benefits under SCHIP? It was the benefit side that has real resonance,
>> > not the deportation thing."

>>
>> > A new national poll for National Public Radio, conducted by the
>> > Democratic polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, and the Republican
>> > firm Public Opinion Strategies, found that voters are more likely to
>> > side with Democrats than Republicans on war, taxes and spending, the
>> > economy, health care and health insurance for children, often by wide
>> > margins. Onimmigration, the Republicans hold a 49 to 44 percent lead.

>>
>> > But even that might be deceptively tight, said Glen Bolger, a partner
>> > with Public Opinion Strategies. In the poll, the GOP position was
>> > framed as getting control of the border, requiringillegalimmigrants
>> > to reenter the country legally, stoppingillegalimmigrants from
>> > getting government benefits and sendingillegalimmigrants who are
>> > criminals packing. The Democratic position was, "It is impractical to
>> > expel 12 million people, but we need tougher controls at the borders,
>> > tougher penalties on employers who hireillegalimmigrants and we
>> > should barillegalimmigrants from getting most government benefits,
>> > while allowing the law-abiding immigrants to get on a long path to
>> > citizenship."

>>
>> > That Democratic message is much tougher than the one most voters are
>> > hearing, Bolger argued. "They're actually in worse shape than they
>> > think they are," he said.

>>
>> > Dustin Olson, Ogonowski's campaign manager, said the candidate did not
>> > intend to make government benefits forillegalimmigrants a
>> > centerpiece of the campaign, but it came up unbidden, again and again.

>>
>> > Internal polling found that Ogonowski's tough stance was winning 60
>> > percent to 30 percent over the positions articulated by Tsongas, said
>> > Rob Autry, another Public Opinion Strategies partner who served as
>> > Ogonowski's pollster. Ogonowski's position on taxes had a narrower, 13
>> > percentage point lead. Every other issue "was dicey," he said.

>>
>> > Then, just two days before Tuesday's balloting, Tsongas saidillegal
>> > immigrants should each be allowed to get a driver's license. The final
>> > radio ad of the Ogonowski insurgency intoned, "And now for something
>> > truly incredible. You already know Niki Tsongas supports amnesty for
>> >illegalimmigrants, but today we learned Niki Tsongas would go even
>> > further. Tsongas told the Boston Herald she wants to give driver's
>> > licenes toillegalimmigrants."

>>
>> > John Walsh, chairman of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, said the
>> > final vote proved the limits of theimmigrationmessage. The district
>> > may be less Democratic than the presidential numbers make it appear,
>> > he cautioned. Republican gubernatorial candidates have carried it
>> > handily since 1990, until Deval L. Patrick, the current Democratic
>> > governor, won it with 51 percent of the vote, the same percentage
>> > Tsongas took.

>>
>> > If Ogonowski's internal polling showed him trailing by 10 points in
>> > September, hisimmigrationblitz made up only five points, he said.

>>
>> > But in districts where Democrats do not have five points to give,
>> > those numbers loom large. "For the American people, and therefore all
>> > of us, it's emerged as the third rail of American politics," Emanuel
>> > said. "And anyone who doesn't realize that isn't with the American
>> > people."

>>
>> Lead by the twerpish Sen. Reid (D-NV) Dems push for the Dream Act
>> (amnesty forillegalaliens) the Democrats are destroying their
>> image of being for "the little guy". The
>> Dems only concern is for votes and to hell
>> with the future of America. Sadly, the Democrats
>> are willing to aid and abet the population blastingillegalalien movement.
>> What about the environmental
>> destruction caused by population growth?
>>
>> ted- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -

>
> The DEM's are no longer for the little guy....They are strickly for
> "THEMSELVES". "I'm getting mine, screw you," is their theme now that
> they are in power. They want to stay in power making all of the money
> they can at our expense......
> If they get 'Amnesty' for the ILLEGALS , they get votes (forever)....
> and with that they make money (forever) from lobbyists who pay them
> their
> $ 14,900. every three months.( Nearly $ 60,000 extra above their
> salary of 160,000 per year, nice huh ?)
>
> Politics suck for the constituency...!!!!
>
> We elected them to "represent us" and they are totally ignoring
> us.......
>
> Its past time to "VOTE OUT DEMO's " regardless of what Party you are
> from.
> We voted out the Repub's when they were in charge, and they learned a
> very sound lesson, now its time to teach it to the DEMP's.
>
> VOTE out the "DEMO incumbents"....!!!!
> The new party will be called "THE ANERICAN PARTY" and its totally, and
> all (for) the Citizens of USA...!!!
>
>
 
"Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4723816f$0$15353$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>I hear an awful lot of complaints about illegal immigration, and I have yet
>to hear anyone with a way to solve the illegal immigration problem. I hear
>piecemeal solutions to the problem, which does not solve the problem. I
>hear complaints when someone does propose ideas that would go a long way to
>greatly reducing the illegal immigration problem, but I do not hear from
>anyone a comprehensive solution to solving the illegal immigration problem.
>And I am not convinced that the "problem" has a "solution".
>

While I agree that a comprehensive solution is going to be difficult, I can
say that what the government is doing now is
not helping the situation.

We need to stop offering their kids free schooling.
We need to stop offering them free medical treatment for other than life
threatening situations.
We need to stop giving them the ability to stay in this country if they have
a baby born here.
We need to stop treating them better than we treat our own citizens.
We need to prosecute the people and businesses in this country that employ
them (illegally).

IF we can make conditions for undocumented and illegal aliens in this
country no better than they are in their
home country, they will stop coming.

As it is, they know they will get preferential treatment, free medical, free
education for their kids, and a shot at citizenship
if they have a baby while here in illegal status.

The vast majority of illegal's in this country do not want to become
citizens. They do not want to pay taxes in this country.
They want to make as much illegal money as possible and send it out of the
country to their families.

Given that they are human beings, they are nothing more than parasites.

Treating them like we do now will only continue to make the problem worse.

I am sorry if I offend anyone who is afflicted with liberalism. However, I
am not responsible for anyone suffering that
terrible condition.

Honu
 
"Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4723816f$0$15353$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>I hear an awful lot of complaints about illegal immigration, and I have yet
>to hear anyone with a way to solve the illegal immigration problem. I hear
>piecemeal solutions to the problem, which does not solve the problem. I
>hear complaints when someone does propose ideas that would go a long way to
>greatly reducing the illegal immigration problem, but I do not hear from
>anyone a comprehensive solution to solving the illegal immigration problem.
>And I am not convinced that the "problem" has a "solution".
>

While I agree that a comprehensive solution is going to be difficult, I can
say that what the government is doing now is
not helping the situation.

We need to stop offering their kids free schooling.
We need to stop offering them free medical treatment for other than life
threatening situations.
We need to stop giving them the ability to stay in this country if they have
a baby born here.
We need to stop treating them better than we treat our own citizens.
We need to prosecute the people and businesses in this country that employ
them (illegally).

IF we can make conditions for undocumented and illegal aliens in this
country no better than they are in their
home country, they will stop coming.

As it is, they know they will get preferential treatment, free medical, free
education for their kids, and a shot at citizenship
if they have a baby while here in illegal status.

The vast majority of illegal's in this country do not want to become
citizens. They do not want to pay taxes in this country.
They want to make as much illegal money as possible and send it out of the
country to their families.

Given that they are human beings, they are nothing more than parasites.

Treating them like we do now will only continue to make the problem worse.

I am sorry if I offend anyone who is afflicted with liberalism. However, I
am not responsible for anyone suffering that
terrible condition.

Honu
 
"Hertz_Donut" <somewhere@outhere.net> wrote in message
news:urGdnbLEG_-P-bnanZ2dnUVZ_o2vnZ2d@hawaiiantel.net...
> "Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:4723816f$0$15353$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>I hear an awful lot of complaints about illegal immigration, and I have
>>yet to hear anyone with a way to solve the illegal immigration problem. I
>>hear piecemeal solutions to the problem, which does not solve the problem.
>>I hear complaints when someone does propose ideas that would go a long way
>>to greatly reducing the illegal immigration problem, but I do not hear
>>from anyone a comprehensive solution to solving the illegal immigration
>>problem. And I am not convinced that the "problem" has a "solution".
>>

> While I agree that a comprehensive solution is going to be difficult, I
> can say that what the government is doing now is
> not helping the situation.
>
> We need to stop offering their kids free schooling.
> We need to stop offering them free medical treatment for other than life
> threatening situations.
> We need to stop giving them the ability to stay in this country if they
> have a baby born here.
> We need to stop treating them better than we treat our own citizens.
> We need to prosecute the people and businesses in this country that employ
> them (illegally).
>
> IF we can make conditions for undocumented and illegal aliens in this
> country no better than they are in their
> home country, they will stop coming.
>
> As it is, they know they will get preferential treatment, free medical,
> free education for their kids, and a shot at citizenship
> if they have a baby while here in illegal status.
>
> The vast majority of illegal's in this country do not want to become
> citizens. They do not want to pay taxes in this country.
> They want to make as much illegal money as possible and send it out of the
> country to their families.
>
> Given that they are human beings, they are nothing more than parasites.
>
> Treating them like we do now will only continue to make the problem worse.
>
> I am sorry if I offend anyone who is afflicted with liberalism. However,
> I am not responsible for anyone suffering that
> terrible condition.
>
> Honu


I'd like to add to your above suggestions. You have some good points but we
have to realize that many illegals are here, needed and completely removing
them would be difficult and unproductie for our economy. I completely
agree with changing the law concerning citizenship to babies born of
illegals. Maybe we could start a new temp status and provide ID for a
specific period of time, say 3, 4 or 5 years or whatever time fraame. After
that the person could apply for renewal and as long as they are employed and
have followed the law then they can renew. However, if they become disabled
or reach retirement age (65) then they can no longer renew their status
(under any circumstance)and would have to return to their native country.
At any time they could apply for citizenship through normal channels with no
preference. This way the person would have an incentive to gain citizenship
but if they chose not to then they wovuld not be welcome to stay after they
could no longer work. Primary school education would be acceptable but no
free education (or government loans) after high school. Maybe we could
negotiate a procedure where their native country could pay the tuition. The
children would fall under the same restrictions as the parents and if the
child is involved with crime then the child and parents are deported. Adopt
strong penalties against employers knowingly employ illegals. Immigrants
with a temp worker visa would be allowed a drivers license but could not
vote, own real estate or start a business. Law enforcement authorities at
all levels would be required to enforce all immigration laws and states with
sanctuary cities would have most of their federeal funding placed on hold.
Those officials/persons involved with harboring illegals would be guilty of
a felony.

Make the process fair and humane and offer those who choose to work here and
not gain citizenship the respect they deserve as a human being but not
provide the benefits of being a citizen.
>
>
 
"Hertz_Donut" <somewhere@outhere.net> wrote in message
news:urGdnbLEG_-P-bnanZ2dnUVZ_o2vnZ2d@hawaiiantel.net...
> "Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:4723816f$0$15353$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>I hear an awful lot of complaints about illegal immigration, and I have
>>yet to hear anyone with a way to solve the illegal immigration problem. I
>>hear piecemeal solutions to the problem, which does not solve the problem.
>>I hear complaints when someone does propose ideas that would go a long way
>>to greatly reducing the illegal immigration problem, but I do not hear
>>from anyone a comprehensive solution to solving the illegal immigration
>>problem. And I am not convinced that the "problem" has a "solution".
>>

> While I agree that a comprehensive solution is going to be difficult, I
> can say that what the government is doing now is
> not helping the situation.
>
> We need to stop offering their kids free schooling.
> We need to stop offering them free medical treatment for other than life
> threatening situations.
> We need to stop giving them the ability to stay in this country if they
> have a baby born here.
> We need to stop treating them better than we treat our own citizens.
> We need to prosecute the people and businesses in this country that employ
> them (illegally).
>
> IF we can make conditions for undocumented and illegal aliens in this
> country no better than they are in their
> home country, they will stop coming.
>
> As it is, they know they will get preferential treatment, free medical,
> free education for their kids, and a shot at citizenship
> if they have a baby while here in illegal status.
>
> The vast majority of illegal's in this country do not want to become
> citizens. They do not want to pay taxes in this country.
> They want to make as much illegal money as possible and send it out of the
> country to their families.
>
> Given that they are human beings, they are nothing more than parasites.
>
> Treating them like we do now will only continue to make the problem worse.
>
> I am sorry if I offend anyone who is afflicted with liberalism. However,
> I am not responsible for anyone suffering that
> terrible condition.
>
> Honu


I'd like to add to your above suggestions. You have some good points but we
have to realize that many illegals are here, needed and completely removing
them would be difficult and unproductie for our economy. I completely
agree with changing the law concerning citizenship to babies born of
illegals. Maybe we could start a new temp status and provide ID for a
specific period of time, say 3, 4 or 5 years or whatever time fraame. After
that the person could apply for renewal and as long as they are employed and
have followed the law then they can renew. However, if they become disabled
or reach retirement age (65) then they can no longer renew their status
(under any circumstance)and would have to return to their native country.
At any time they could apply for citizenship through normal channels with no
preference. This way the person would have an incentive to gain citizenship
but if they chose not to then they wovuld not be welcome to stay after they
could no longer work. Primary school education would be acceptable but no
free education (or government loans) after high school. Maybe we could
negotiate a procedure where their native country could pay the tuition. The
children would fall under the same restrictions as the parents and if the
child is involved with crime then the child and parents are deported. Adopt
strong penalties against employers knowingly employ illegals. Immigrants
with a temp worker visa would be allowed a drivers license but could not
vote, own real estate or start a business. Law enforcement authorities at
all levels would be required to enforce all immigration laws and states with
sanctuary cities would have most of their federeal funding placed on hold.
Those officials/persons involved with harboring illegals would be guilty of
a felony.

Make the process fair and humane and offer those who choose to work here and
not gain citizenship the respect they deserve as a human being but not
provide the benefits of being a citizen.
>
>
 
Justin Case wrote:

> I'd like to add to your above suggestions. You have some good points but we
> have to realize that many illegals are here, needed and completely removing
> them would be difficult and unproductie for our economy.


Thats what some want you to believe. I for one don't. Importing cheap
labor helps only in the short term. In the long term it hurts our
economy. Cracking down on corporations that knowingly hire illegals
needs to be done. Sure there will be some pain felt in stopping the
trend but that pain will be for the short term only.

> I completely
> agree with changing the law concerning citizenship to babies born of
> illegals.


That requires a constitutional amendment but I believe its an important
one. I feel only babies born to at least one legal citizens should
become a citizen themselves. I also do not feel that having a child
that is a citizen should grant illegals residency status.

> Make the process fair and humane and offer those who choose to work here and
> not gain citizenship the respect they deserve as a human being but not
> provide the benefits of being a citizen.


They are here illegally. They broke the law in entering. They should
not be rewarded for breaking the law. Whats ironic is that many of the
illegals have been here for decades. Had they applied years ago they
would now be citizens. Giving them legal status is a slap in the face
to those that came here through the legal process.
 
Justin Case wrote:

> I'd like to add to your above suggestions. You have some good points but we
> have to realize that many illegals are here, needed and completely removing
> them would be difficult and unproductie for our economy.


Thats what some want you to believe. I for one don't. Importing cheap
labor helps only in the short term. In the long term it hurts our
economy. Cracking down on corporations that knowingly hire illegals
needs to be done. Sure there will be some pain felt in stopping the
trend but that pain will be for the short term only.

> I completely
> agree with changing the law concerning citizenship to babies born of
> illegals.


That requires a constitutional amendment but I believe its an important
one. I feel only babies born to at least one legal citizens should
become a citizen themselves. I also do not feel that having a child
that is a citizen should grant illegals residency status.

> Make the process fair and humane and offer those who choose to work here and
> not gain citizenship the respect they deserve as a human being but not
> provide the benefits of being a citizen.


They are here illegally. They broke the law in entering. They should
not be rewarded for breaking the law. Whats ironic is that many of the
illegals have been here for decades. Had they applied years ago they
would now be citizens. Giving them legal status is a slap in the face
to those that came here through the legal process.
 
"Hertz_Donut" <somewhere@outhere.net> wrote in message
news:urGdnbLEG_-P-bnanZ2dnUVZ_o2vnZ2d@hawaiiantel.net...
> "Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:4723816f$0$15353$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>I hear an awful lot of complaints about illegal immigration, and I have
>>yet to hear anyone with a way to solve the illegal immigration problem. I
>>hear piecemeal solutions to the problem, which does not solve the problem.
>>I hear complaints when someone does propose ideas that would go a long way
>>to greatly reducing the illegal immigration problem, but I do not hear
>>from anyone a comprehensive solution to solving the illegal immigration
>>problem. And I am not convinced that the "problem" has a "solution".
>>

> While I agree that a comprehensive solution is going to be difficult, I
> can say that what the government is doing now is
> not helping the situation.


every "solution" has its advantages and disadvantages.
>
> We need to stop offering their kids free schooling.


If the children are not in school, they are going to be put to work, or they
will be roaming the streets of our cities and towns, getting into all kinds
of mischief, and perhaps many joining gangs.

> We need to stop offering them free medical treatment for other than life
> threatening situations.


Someone shows up an the emergency wing of your local hospital. You do not
know if they are legal or illegal. So, in order to separate the wheat from
the chaff, you first have to determine who is legal and who is illegal. In
order to do that, you need to ask for some sort of proof of legal status
that the person is a citizen of the United States, or a legal resident of
the United Sttes. What are you going to require them to present? A
passport? Can you imagine asking Americans that if you show up at an
emergency wing of your local hospital you better bring a passport with you.
Or when you are in an auto accident and are injured, you better have some
proof of citizenship in you car?

> We need to stop giving them the ability to stay in this country if they
> have a baby born here.


So, you would separate the mother from the child?

> We need to stop treating them better than we treat our own citizens.
> We need to prosecute the people and businesses in this country that employ
> them (illegally).


No problem with that
>
> IF we can make conditions for undocumented and illegal aliens in this
> country no better than they are in their
> home country, they will stop coming.


therein lies the trick....how do you do that....
>
> As it is, they know they will get preferential treatment, free medical,
> free education for their kids, and a shot at citizenship
> if they have a baby while here in illegal status.
>
> The vast majority of illegal's in this country do not want to become
> citizens.


How can they even try to become legal residents or citizens when they are in
this country illegally. Seems to me to be one of those Catch 22 situations.

They do not want to pay taxes in this country.
> They want to make as much illegal money as possible and send it out of the
> country to their families.


Well yes. If you pay taxes, that may only result in them finding you.
 
"Hertz_Donut" <somewhere@outhere.net> wrote in message
news:urGdnbLEG_-P-bnanZ2dnUVZ_o2vnZ2d@hawaiiantel.net...
> "Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:4723816f$0$15353$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>I hear an awful lot of complaints about illegal immigration, and I have
>>yet to hear anyone with a way to solve the illegal immigration problem. I
>>hear piecemeal solutions to the problem, which does not solve the problem.
>>I hear complaints when someone does propose ideas that would go a long way
>>to greatly reducing the illegal immigration problem, but I do not hear
>>from anyone a comprehensive solution to solving the illegal immigration
>>problem. And I am not convinced that the "problem" has a "solution".
>>

> While I agree that a comprehensive solution is going to be difficult, I
> can say that what the government is doing now is
> not helping the situation.


every "solution" has its advantages and disadvantages.
>
> We need to stop offering their kids free schooling.


If the children are not in school, they are going to be put to work, or they
will be roaming the streets of our cities and towns, getting into all kinds
of mischief, and perhaps many joining gangs.

> We need to stop offering them free medical treatment for other than life
> threatening situations.


Someone shows up an the emergency wing of your local hospital. You do not
know if they are legal or illegal. So, in order to separate the wheat from
the chaff, you first have to determine who is legal and who is illegal. In
order to do that, you need to ask for some sort of proof of legal status
that the person is a citizen of the United States, or a legal resident of
the United Sttes. What are you going to require them to present? A
passport? Can you imagine asking Americans that if you show up at an
emergency wing of your local hospital you better bring a passport with you.
Or when you are in an auto accident and are injured, you better have some
proof of citizenship in you car?

> We need to stop giving them the ability to stay in this country if they
> have a baby born here.


So, you would separate the mother from the child?

> We need to stop treating them better than we treat our own citizens.
> We need to prosecute the people and businesses in this country that employ
> them (illegally).


No problem with that
>
> IF we can make conditions for undocumented and illegal aliens in this
> country no better than they are in their
> home country, they will stop coming.


therein lies the trick....how do you do that....
>
> As it is, they know they will get preferential treatment, free medical,
> free education for their kids, and a shot at citizenship
> if they have a baby while here in illegal status.
>
> The vast majority of illegal's in this country do not want to become
> citizens.


How can they even try to become legal residents or citizens when they are in
this country illegally. Seems to me to be one of those Catch 22 situations.

They do not want to pay taxes in this country.
> They want to make as much illegal money as possible and send it out of the
> country to their families.


Well yes. If you pay taxes, that may only result in them finding you.
 
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 00:27:04 -1000, "Hertz_Donut" <somewhere@outhere.net> wrote:

>"Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
>news:4723816f$0$15353$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>I hear an awful lot of complaints about illegal immigration, and I have yet
>>to hear anyone with a way to solve the illegal immigration problem. I hear
>>piecemeal solutions to the problem, which does not solve the problem. I
>>hear complaints when someone does propose ideas that would go a long way to
>>greatly reducing the illegal immigration problem, but I do not hear from
>>anyone a comprehensive solution to solving the illegal immigration problem.
>>And I am not convinced that the "problem" has a "solution".
>>

>While I agree that a comprehensive solution is going to be difficult, I can
>say that what the government is doing now is
>not helping the situation.
>
>We need to stop offering their kids free schooling.
>We need to stop offering them free medical treatment for other than life
>threatening situations.
>We need to stop giving them the ability to stay in this country if they have
>a baby born here.
>We need to stop treating them better than we treat our own citizens.
>We need to prosecute the people and businesses in this country that employ
>them (illegally).
>
> IF we can make conditions for undocumented and illegal aliens in this
>country no better than they are in their
>home country, they will stop coming.
>
>As it is, they know they will get preferential treatment, free medical, free
>education for their kids, and a shot at citizenship
>if they have a baby while here in illegal status.
>
>The vast majority of illegal's in this country do not want to become
>citizens. They do not want to pay taxes in this country.
>They want to make as much illegal money as possible and send it out of the
>country to their families.
>
>Given that they are human beings, they are nothing more than parasites.
>
>Treating them like we do now will only continue to make the problem worse.
>
>I am sorry if I offend anyone who is afflicted with liberalism. However, I
>am not responsible for anyone suffering that
>terrible condition.
>
>Honu
>

Good post. You left out the part about cutting all federal funds to sanctuary
cities....AAC
 
"Justin Case" <jeffile@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:iQ2Vi.1276$yV6.1145@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
>
> "Hertz_Donut" <somewhere@outhere.net> wrote in message
> news:urGdnbLEG_-P-bnanZ2dnUVZ_o2vnZ2d@hawaiiantel.net...
>> "Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
>> news:4723816f$0$15353$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>>I hear an awful lot of complaints about illegal immigration, and I have
>>>yet to hear anyone with a way to solve the illegal immigration problem.
>>>I hear piecemeal solutions to the problem, which does not solve the
>>>problem. I hear complaints when someone does propose ideas that would go
>>>a long way to greatly reducing the illegal immigration problem, but I do
>>>not hear from anyone a comprehensive solution to solving the illegal
>>>immigration problem. And I am not convinced that the "problem" has a
>>>"solution".
>>>

>> While I agree that a comprehensive solution is going to be difficult, I
>> can say that what the government is doing now is
>> not helping the situation.
>>
>> We need to stop offering their kids free schooling.
>> We need to stop offering them free medical treatment for other than life
>> threatening situations.
>> We need to stop giving them the ability to stay in this country if they
>> have a baby born here.
>> We need to stop treating them better than we treat our own citizens.
>> We need to prosecute the people and businesses in this country that
>> employ them (illegally).
>>
>> IF we can make conditions for undocumented and illegal aliens in this
>> country no better than they are in their
>> home country, they will stop coming.
>>
>> As it is, they know they will get preferential treatment, free medical,
>> free education for their kids, and a shot at citizenship
>> if they have a baby while here in illegal status.
>>
>> The vast majority of illegal's in this country do not want to become
>> citizens. They do not want to pay taxes in this country.
>> They want to make as much illegal money as possible and send it out of
>> the country to their families.
>>
>> Given that they are human beings, they are nothing more than parasites.
>>
>> Treating them like we do now will only continue to make the problem
>> worse.
>>
>> I am sorry if I offend anyone who is afflicted with liberalism. However,
>> I am not responsible for anyone suffering that
>> terrible condition.
>>
>> Honu

>
> I'd like to add to your above suggestions. You have some good points but
> we have to realize that many illegals are here, needed and completely
> removing them would be difficult and unproductie for our economy.



Completely wrong. We cannot give up the security of our country for cheap
labor.
The is absolutely no reason....no reason at all...to justify any form of
illegal immigration.

I completely
> agree with changing the law concerning citizenship to babies born of
> illegals. Maybe we could start a new temp status and provide ID for a
> specific period of time, say 3, 4 or 5 years or whatever time fraame.



That is still far too generous. The illegals would exploit any such system
to reamin in this country for years, sucking money and services out of the
economy. It is a no win situation.

After
> that the person could apply for renewal and as long as they are employed
> and have followed the law then they can renew.



Still not a legal immigrant, not a legalized citizen, and still a parasite
on the system.
If they are going to be allowed to stay, they should be taxed at a higher
rate, since they are not citizens.
When they are naturalized, their taxes would drop to the same level as other
tax payers.
They should have to pay for schooling for their children, as they are not
citizens. They should have to pay for any
medical and dental treatments that are not life threatening.

No one should get a free pass for being an illegal immagrant.


However, if they become disabled
> or reach retirement age (65) then they can no longer renew their status
> (under any circumstance)and would have to return to their native country.
> At any time they could apply for citizenship through normal channels with
> no preference.


And most swould never do that. The vast majority of illegals in this
country do not desire citizenship. They do not desire to be "Americans".
They merely want to make as much money as they can, free of the burden of
taxes and having to pay rfor the services we so generoulsy give them. They
want to take their ill-gotten money and send it out of the country.
Parasites.

This way the person would have an incentive to gain citizenship
> but if they chose not to then they wovuld not be welcome to stay after
> they could no longer work.


There is no "incentive for citizenship". They are not here to be citizens.
Even if offered citizenship, they would refuse, because they know they would
have to pay taxes, find health insurance, would not get Federal assistance
for food and housing...in short, becoming a citizen would take away
everything htey are here for.


Primary school education would be acceptable but no
> free education (or government loans) after high school.


There should be no free schooling at any level. Citizens who are paying
taxes to pay for the school systems are entitled to have thier families
attend these schools. If illegals wish to have their children attend
American schools, they should have to PAY for the privilege. We do, and
we are citizens. Why should they get it free...ever?


Maybe we could
> negotiate a procedure where their native country could pay the tuition.



That would never happen. If "they" could afford to do that, those countries
would have jobs and schools worthy of keeping thier citizens at home.


The
> children would fall under the same restrictions as the parents and if the
> child is involved with crime then the child and parents are deported.
> Adopt strong penalties against employers knowingly employ illegals.
> Immigrants with a temp worker visa would be allowed a drivers license but
> could not vote, own real estate or start a business. Law enforcement
> authorities at all levels would be required to enforce all immigration
> laws and states with sanctuary cities would have most of their federeal
> funding placed on hold. Those officials/persons involved with harboring
> illegals would be guilty of a felony.
>
> Make the process fair and humane and offer those who choose to work here
> and not gain citizenship the respect they deserve as a human being but not
> provide the benefits of being a citizen.



This country needs to stop falling prey to the
liberal agenda, and wake up to the fact that we cannot continue
to feed the parasites. The system will collapse, just as any system in
nature collapses when more is taken out than is put in.

We owe them NOTHING . Yet the liberal agenda would have us give them
everything. It is simply not a viable doctrine.

Honu
 
There's so many excellent points and good ideas being offered by citizens of this
country. Too bad members of congress and the senate aren't all of the same patriotic
stripe....AAC



On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 18:49:43 -1000, "Hertz_Donut" <somewhere@outhere.net> wrote:

>"Justin Case" <jeffile@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>news:iQ2Vi.1276$yV6.1145@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
>>
>> "Hertz_Donut" <somewhere@outhere.net> wrote in message
>> news:urGdnbLEG_-P-bnanZ2dnUVZ_o2vnZ2d@hawaiiantel.net...
>>> "Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
>>> news:4723816f$0$15353$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>>>I hear an awful lot of complaints about illegal immigration, and I have
>>>>yet to hear anyone with a way to solve the illegal immigration problem.
>>>>I hear piecemeal solutions to the problem, which does not solve the
>>>>problem. I hear complaints when someone does propose ideas that would go
>>>>a long way to greatly reducing the illegal immigration problem, but I do
>>>>not hear from anyone a comprehensive solution to solving the illegal
>>>>immigration problem. And I am not convinced that the "problem" has a
>>>>"solution".
>>>>
>>> While I agree that a comprehensive solution is going to be difficult, I
>>> can say that what the government is doing now is
>>> not helping the situation.
>>>
>>> We need to stop offering their kids free schooling.
>>> We need to stop offering them free medical treatment for other than life
>>> threatening situations.
>>> We need to stop giving them the ability to stay in this country if they
>>> have a baby born here.
>>> We need to stop treating them better than we treat our own citizens.
>>> We need to prosecute the people and businesses in this country that
>>> employ them (illegally).
>>>
>>> IF we can make conditions for undocumented and illegal aliens in this
>>> country no better than they are in their
>>> home country, they will stop coming.
>>>
>>> As it is, they know they will get preferential treatment, free medical,
>>> free education for their kids, and a shot at citizenship
>>> if they have a baby while here in illegal status.
>>>
>>> The vast majority of illegal's in this country do not want to become
>>> citizens. They do not want to pay taxes in this country.
>>> They want to make as much illegal money as possible and send it out of
>>> the country to their families.
>>>
>>> Given that they are human beings, they are nothing more than parasites.
>>>
>>> Treating them like we do now will only continue to make the problem
>>> worse.
>>>
>>> I am sorry if I offend anyone who is afflicted with liberalism. However,
>>> I am not responsible for anyone suffering that
>>> terrible condition.
>>>
>>> Honu

>>
>> I'd like to add to your above suggestions. You have some good points but
>> we have to realize that many illegals are here, needed and completely
>> removing them would be difficult and unproductie for our economy.

>
>
>Completely wrong. We cannot give up the security of our country for cheap
>labor.
>The is absolutely no reason....no reason at all...to justify any form of
>illegal immigration.
>
> I completely
>> agree with changing the law concerning citizenship to babies born of
>> illegals. Maybe we could start a new temp status and provide ID for a
>> specific period of time, say 3, 4 or 5 years or whatever time fraame.

>
>
>That is still far too generous. The illegals would exploit any such system
>to reamin in this country for years, sucking money and services out of the
>economy. It is a no win situation.
>
> After
>> that the person could apply for renewal and as long as they are employed
>> and have followed the law then they can renew.

>
>
>Still not a legal immigrant, not a legalized citizen, and still a parasite
>on the system.
>If they are going to be allowed to stay, they should be taxed at a higher
>rate, since they are not citizens.
>When they are naturalized, their taxes would drop to the same level as other
>tax payers.
>They should have to pay for schooling for their children, as they are not
>citizens. They should have to pay for any
>medical and dental treatments that are not life threatening.
>
>No one should get a free pass for being an illegal immagrant.
>
>
> However, if they become disabled
>> or reach retirement age (65) then they can no longer renew their status
>> (under any circumstance)and would have to return to their native country.
>> At any time they could apply for citizenship through normal channels with
>> no preference.

>
>And most swould never do that. The vast majority of illegals in this
>country do not desire citizenship. They do not desire to be "Americans".
>They merely want to make as much money as they can, free of the burden of
>taxes and having to pay rfor the services we so generoulsy give them. They
>want to take their ill-gotten money and send it out of the country.
>Parasites.
>
> This way the person would have an incentive to gain citizenship
>> but if they chose not to then they wovuld not be welcome to stay after
>> they could no longer work.

>
>There is no "incentive for citizenship". They are not here to be citizens.
>Even if offered citizenship, they would refuse, because they know they would
>have to pay taxes, find health insurance, would not get Federal assistance
>for food and housing...in short, becoming a citizen would take away
>everything htey are here for.
>
>
> Primary school education would be acceptable but no
>> free education (or government loans) after high school.

>
>There should be no free schooling at any level. Citizens who are paying
>taxes to pay for the school systems are entitled to have thier families
>attend these schools. If illegals wish to have their children attend
>American schools, they should have to PAY for the privilege. We do, and
>we are citizens. Why should they get it free...ever?
>
>
> Maybe we could
>> negotiate a procedure where their native country could pay the tuition.

>
>
>That would never happen. If "they" could afford to do that, those countries
>would have jobs and schools worthy of keeping thier citizens at home.
>
>
> The
>> children would fall under the same restrictions as the parents and if the
>> child is involved with crime then the child and parents are deported.
>> Adopt strong penalties against employers knowingly employ illegals.
>> Immigrants with a temp worker visa would be allowed a drivers license but
>> could not vote, own real estate or start a business. Law enforcement
>> authorities at all levels would be required to enforce all immigration
>> laws and states with sanctuary cities would have most of their federeal
>> funding placed on hold. Those officials/persons involved with harboring
>> illegals would be guilty of a felony.
>>
>> Make the process fair and humane and offer those who choose to work here
>> and not gain citizenship the respect they deserve as a human being but not
>> provide the benefits of being a citizen.

>
>
>This country needs to stop falling prey to the
>liberal agenda, and wake up to the fact that we cannot continue
>to feed the parasites. The system will collapse, just as any system in
>nature collapses when more is taken out than is put in.
>
>We owe them NOTHING . Yet the liberal agenda would have us give them
>everything. It is simply not a viable doctrine.
>
>Honu
>
>
 
Back
Top