I see you using this many times, I have to conclude you are not as perceptive as you think. And you are ignoring that others already came to the conclusion that your points are pipe dreams.
That is not the main beef, the main beef is assuming there is a nefarious plot for the peaceful nature of the protests.
Do I have to assume you don’t care what you say?
Frankly your answer on the Minutemen has made you earn all condescension.
You don’t have to DO anything. But you can rightly assume that I no longer care what you say. You are dense, condescending, not very bright, and do not know how to debate.
As I just said in the other thread, we are done.
When other dopers notice how tiresome you are, that is a relief.
I haven’t worked for a law firm in a year and a half, and even when I did, we specialized in skilled, employment-based immigration, and rarely dealt with anyone here illegally. Now I work in-house in the legal department at a large multinational corporation; again, I do skilled-employment-based immigration, and rarely deal with anyone here illegally. I also advise HR staff, managers, etc. on immigration law compliance, including telling people they can’t hire someone or will have to take someone off payroll for not having valid employment authorization. (Also, the vast majority of people I deal with aren’t Hispanic at all.)
So sorry, there goes your theory.
As soon as someone calls you out, you insult them. You’re weak and really not worth the effort.
Geez I only said you are dense but you resorted to insult me, As others like Eva Luna show, you are not even worth the effort to insult properly.
Nope. Immigration law firms will benefit tremendously from any legislation that legitimizes illegals.
You invented an argument no-one was making for your own purposes. Then, when posters were either ignoring your argument or poking holes in it you started insulting people.
You’re weak.
I only insult when others show their true colors or willful ignorance, **magellian01 ** showed it in spades when in the GD thread where he still insisted in defending the Minutemen even when I showed him the leader in Texas quit because he did not like the prevailing racism.
And your point was to implied that the marchers were illegal and you are to laugh when many here have poked holes at that.
And if you had checked my cite:
http://ktla.trb.com/news/ktla-timesimmigration,0,2858359.story?coll=ktla-news-1
One of the objectives of the main organizers, besides coming officially against supporting the boycott, was to organize voter registration drives, silly if the majority there were illegals.
As the protesters showed, you are now only wishful thinking.
posted too soon:
I only insult when others show their true colors or willful ignorance, **magellian01 ** showed it in spades like in the GD thread where he still insisted in defending the Minutemen even when I showed him the leader in Texas quit because he did not like the prevailing racism.
And your point was to imply that the marchers were illegal and you are to laugh when many here have poked holes at that.
And if you had checked my cite:
http://ktla.trb.com/news/ktla-timesimmigration,0,2858359.story?coll=ktla-news-1
One of the objectives of the main organizers, besides coming officially against supporting the boycott (too complicated to explain that in the mainstream media it seems), was to organize voter registration drives, silly if the majority there were illegals.
As the protesters showed, you are now only wishful thinking.
I meant your theory that I personally, or the firm I used to work for, would benefit in some way from an amnesty. I’ve never worked for a firm or company that had any significant dealings with people who weren’t already in the U.S. legally.
Absolutely agree. Sorry, I did personalize it to you thinking that you worked for a immigration law firm in Chicago. I was wrong, so I take that back.
I stand by my point though that any legislation will benefit immigration lawyers but I unreservedly take it back vis-a-vis your personal situation!