I’m still here, but wiht no idea of geographic area, etc. I can’t do much. Plus most of my contacts are local, naturally (though I can probably get recommendations from colleagues).
Are you implying that all who got in because the laws were changed were guilty of a similar crime? :wally
It is fine because a fine is a slap for not coming in properly, not to mention other measures, like forced to learn english or else you are out, are part of the deal.
And I’m glad for that , like Elliot Ness during prohibition. But the law had to be left behind because the price to pay was indeed dear. Sorry, magellan01, in other discussions I have found your sources mentioning the cost to our nation are not quite reliable, and other economists mentioned that legalization got rid of that cost, so stop your idiocy of applying the same value as murder, embezzlement, and rape to such a crime like being illegal, a crime that we have the chance to change the rules a little so then we can have funds to enforce a more human law.
It’s not like anyone can walk in to an embassy and start the paperwork to immigrate. The vast majority of people have absolutely no chance of making it here. To tell them “do it the legal way” is like telling them that if they want to fly they better start flapping their arms. It’s not a matter of patience and hard work. It’s a matter of money and class.
I have a family member right now who is living in a third world country to be with his boyfriend. He’s tried everything- everything in the world- to get his boyfriend here. But thanks to post 9/11 regulations, his boyfriend (who, ironically, works for an American company, making America richer as we speak) will never be able to make it here. In that country homosexuality is punishable by ten years of inprisonment. But it’s still a more hospitable place than here.
It’s fucked up.
You simply can’t be that stupid and still be able to type. Therefore I can only assume that dishonesty like this is a technique of yours, in which case I have bettere things to do. If you actaully have somehting to offer, even perhaps a new way of looking at part of the issue, please share it. Otherwise, go look for something shiney to play with.
All right! We’ve got Eva! Tell the lady your problem… somehow. She’ll do what she can to put you on the right path.
How funny, you were the one that dishonestly wrought that up, and I consider your roll eyes smilie does not save you:
Another mention of your stupid post is needed.
You will never get any respect when your debating tactics require you to equate crimes like that to people that make things right and helped America during the 80’s and 90’s.
I lost about 7 years of taxes because I could not file taxes until I became legal, even before that I managed to ensure military components (fun radioactive, liquid nitrogen and cancerous chemical tests to make sure those puppies) worked properly in any war environment (some components went to the Tomahawk missiles that said hello to Saddam.)
But now even if I was not an American I can tell you that murder and rape had nothing to do with those exploits, so **magellian01 ** take that equation back.
Granted. We who are here, particularly those of us who have been born here—have won the mega-mega-lottery. To be born in this country, at this time,is truly a gift. There are roughly 6 billion people in the world. I’d say that a large majority of them would love to be living here. That means 3 or 4 billion. I’d bet more. We can’t have them all, so we have immigration laws to control the flow. Those laws have to be followed. If not it is a gross injustice to everyone who wants to come here but hasn’t broken our laws to do so, not to mention a threat to our sovereignity and the rule of law which this land was based upon.
OUr legal immigration laws need total revamping. I don’t know what the number is, but the process shold be smooth and efficient. Friends that have emigrated here tall me the most ridiculous stories about how long it takes.
As long as that revamping does not require catapults.
Look, you said:
So I was pointing out the uselessness of your statement by indicating that you can solve the problem of any illegal behavior by simply making that behavior legal. Sound stupid? Good. That’s the point. Sheesh!
And what do you mean “make them follow”? Follow what? Some sort of rules. Rules like the ones they already broke by being here illegal?
But let’s say we do that—we do exactly as you want. What do you propose we do when some of these people don’t follow these rules? Anything?
Trebuchet, TREBUCHET. With the wall we’re going to build a catapult will never give you the clearance. Get it right.
Yeah! I bet those prohibitionists are happy that **magellan01 ** agrees this late with them, Hurray!
Sorry, it is your equation to things like rape that makes your point stupid.
And I’m in favor of looking for them and deporting them, as the current unfair law says, but I’m working to change it.
More enforcement that now will be funded properly. Incidentally I would be in favor of a proposal like this: make a special tax to people that got in that way like an index, an index that will go up if more illegals enter after the law passes, the idea is to indeed make the former problem part of the solution.
It was better to make the former illegal speakeasy owners to become legal tax paying liquor store owners.
You know, that so-called joke wasn’t funny the first time around, and it’s still not funny.
A Trebuchet is a type of catapult you numbnuts, even on that you are not accurate:
Well, you looked it up and learned something. Excellent. Except that Wiki is not very reliable. Other definitions describe it—more accurately—as a machine for throwing objects. A catapult employs one design, a trebuchet another. They are not synonymous. A trebuchet is a specail kind of catapult, it affords much greater distance. But I’ll try to be clearer next time.
Eva, it was a dumb joke then. It is a dumb joke now. Guess I should have ignored it being brought up. By the way, are you going to respond to my post in your other immigration thread? I’m interested in your response.
I find it interesting that there is no grandfather clause in this law. It’s usually considered bad law to make people criminals after the fact.
Condescension will get you nowhere numbnuts, I did not need to look it up, I knew it already, I only posted a link for those wondering, but others are now wondering less who is dishonest here.
News to them too:
Many other sites refer to them as synonymous even.
Bringing up rape and murder are less so and it is a dumb remark that can not be ignored, not all crimes are the same, being illegal does not deserve the same punishment or resolution, and the law needs to be changed specially when doing nothing will make the situation worse.
That would make it a catapult, now wouldn’t it? Kind of like a Jeep is a car, but a car is not necessarily a Jeep.
I know. First word that popped into my head after a long day. Do you have any information on what is being offered with regards to “amnesty plans.” The most I’ve heard is something along the lines of citizenship based on years in residency and fines/back taxes to be paid. I’d welcome any more information.
Yep. I was thinking of it in the far more simplistic election year definition. “I hate terrorists and want to protect your babies and the american way of life. My distinguished opponent loves terrorism, eats babies, and wants to destroy our family values by letting homosexual muslim extremists marry cargo boxes and commercial airplanes.” Or something like that.
Point was that we’re coming up on midterms and nobody wants to risk their job on a grey area and immigration is awfully grey. Better to wait until after so anything that happens can be blamed on the outgoing president and/or forgotten by the next time their seat comes up.
It will be interesting to see which states make the biggest stink about it, won’t it? Right now the biggest proponent is Tancredo from Colorado. Before this year, his own party considered him sort of a nut case. Suddenly this year, he is some sort of big shot, all because of immigration. This is the same “genius” who said we should bomb Mecca. (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,162795,00.html). Of course later a spokesman said itwas ONLY hypothetical. I guess if this immiration backfires on him, that will only be “hypothetical” also. But then, on the other hand, he also opposes current Senate proposals that would implement a foreign guest worker program, broaden legal immigration, and provide amnesty to illegal aliens currently in the United States. At least he is being consistent (so far). (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/03/29/DI2006032901468.html)
Here is a bunch of info. I’m glad to see someone who is interested in the actual details; the press has sure been blowing off the actual details.
magellan01, I have never claimed to have all the answers re: comprehensive immigration reform. Hell, most of the people who have enforced U.S. immigration laws and/or made immigration policy for their entire careers don’t claim to have all the answers, and it’s abundantly clear that a) no plan exists that will make everyone happy; and b) what we have now isn’t working - basically everyone agrees on that. I even asked a former INS District Director last week what he thought the answer was (I was speaking about legal, employment-based immigration, which isn’t working well either); this is a guy who spent his entire career with INS, the first half of which was with the Border Patrol, like his father before him, and even he agreed there was no way in Hell the U.S. would ever manage to remove 12 million people.
FWIW his ideas for legal, employment-based immigration: scrap all the temporary worker statuses and bring in all needed workers as permanent residents. I asked him for details of this plan, and not too many were forthcoming - what level of legal immigration is right? how would you determine which professions had shortages, and how would you allocate numbers across all the professions? how would you determine which qualified workers got in and what their qualifications were, especially for unskilled or low-skilled workers, who may have a hard time coming up with documentation? What about people who have already been waiting for years - what would you do with them? No answers were forthcoming - it was in a public forum, so he just changed the subject.
By the way, I think all you who are suggesting that the OP’s wife is some kind of evil snake for trying to survive are morally repugnant. You can acknowledge that people have broken the law and still treat them with the respect due any human being who has been forced by circumstances to do something you don’t approve of.