Why are they needed and why can’t they be deported?
Every once in a while, immigrants have a national trans-occupational protest-strike on a weekday, and everybody else always feels it.
That number comes from Big Business and, as such, is highly suspect given Big Business’s insatiable appetite for the cheap labor it gets from illegal immigrants.
Sorry, that wasn’t clear at all. I meant NOT implementing eVerify is even worse. We could turn that on tomorrow. There’s literally no downside. It’s crazy that we don’t do it.
The problem is I don’t believe for a second that it will actually happen. Bills like this have been proposed and passed before and the security never actually gets done.
BTW, what is the level of security of the North Korean border? We have 60,000 troops there last I heard? Let’s move them from that border to ours. That’s actually a good idea. We can keep the North Koreans out of South Korea, but we can’t protect our own countries borders. Madness.
Because what good are promises if they are not followed through with?
You’re confusing words written on paper with all those steps actually done and the border being secured. and going back to your #1, why in the world should anyone believe that the border will be secured this time? Only a fool would. The only way it’s going to happen is if it is done first. Everyone wants comprehensive reform, but the legalization and path to citizenship ideas not to come afterwards. Period.
If you had even skimmed the article, you’d know that number comes from the Center for American Progress, a lefty think tank. Anyway, feel free to share your more accurate source(s).
Oh goody, time for our favorite game “cite/I don’t believe your cite”.
Thanks for pointing that out; that makes the number being bantered about by Big Business even more suspect.
if that’s your favorite game you need to get out more.
OK, so if you don’t trust BigBiz and you don’t trust lefties, who do you trust?
The value of the promises themselves, which in this instance is considerably less than nothing. There is no good reason to secure the border.
:rolleyes: Oh, so your previous comments to my post were just a waste of time? Sigh.:rolleyes:
Aside from that, glad to know where you are coming from. Just let anyone come in, drug dealer, murderous, rapists, people who are currently on the lam, people with infectious diseases, anyone. Whoever has the desire to come here and for whatever reason. Just find your way to the border and step right in. And if they happen to be destitute, no worries, we’ll feed, clothe, house them and get them to the doctors they need. and don’t worry about the cost. Just give the bills to BrainGlutton and he’ll hand them over to the American people.
And people wonder why we can’t get sensible immigration reform. It’s because of this idea that you have that exists with those on the left. They’ll yammer as much as they have to about border security, but they really don’t want it. They’re happy to write security into a bill, but they’re only words and they’re only to put policies in place that are amnesty light or full-on amnesty. Now those things might be a good idea if a country has a secure border, but instituting them without having a secure border simply guarantees more illegal immigration. Not by the engineers and doctors and seasonal workers, but by the gang members and other fine fellows I mentioned earlier.
And the fact that you think this is a good idea leads me to believe that Michael Savage’s take on leftists might have been right, after all.
Border security is a bullshit excuse used by both sides. Those against reform know damn well the border will never be secure enough to satisfy them, and those in favor know border security is the one issue they can appear tough in without actually affecting anything. Border security first, legalization after is simply code for legalization never. The one thing that would make a real difference, throwing the people getting rich of the cheap labor in jail, will never be considered by either side.
YOu make good points, and I’ve long advocated that the most effective thing we can do is going after the employers. I don’t mean just a piddly fine here or there, but putting them in orange jumpsuits and marching their asses to jail. That does mean that we need a mechanism by which an employer can reliably check on one’s status.
But that does not mean border security isn’t also necessary. Even if we have the superset, most lenient, most liberal immigration policy, there are people you want kept out. And you can’t do that without a secure border. And that ignores the whole securing ourselves from terrorists aspects. Fr that reason alone the bipartisan 911 Commission recommended that our border be secured.
Going after employers is important, but so is denying them the other things that go with being a part of society. It’s a stupid policy to say, “Come here and do everything but work.”
What we should have is a liberal immigration policy that allows in most people who want to come here, but makes it easy to get rid of the relatively few who aren’t welcome here, such as criminals, people with infectious diseases, and people who can’t support themselves.
As for what the House will do, they’ll pass a stricter bill and it will go to conference.
What the flying fuck are you on about?
Terrorists get in through the southern border. If there’s no good reason to secure the border, there’s no good reason to secure our ports.
Not to mention a sovereign country gets to decide who is and is not allowed to enter. Should Japan open itself to a flood of Chinese immigrants?