Honestly as a Liberal Democrat I am very thankful for the GOP's compulsive need to keep their "angry white male" base angry enough to keep voting.....this issue is a poison pill for them and could even turn Texas back to blue if they insist on continuing to pander to the Minuteman set. I mean it is hard to make people vote for their own economic self destruction without using "fear"...but fear of brown people only works when the brown people can't vote you out of office by themselves. You can only gerrymander districts so much. Changing demographics/white flight for the win.
I agree that the definition of criminal is one who commits a crime. However, the definition of crime is a violation of the criminal (or penal) statutes. By your own statistics, 56% of those immigrants do not fit any definition of crime. Sam called this a "bipartisan b****slap" because I am far from being a liberal. I, unlike you, am not prepared to piss on the Constitution and the protections it provides to the accused before I go shooting my mouth off about who is a criminal and who is not.
The thing is, the GOP is losing its ability to appeal to any group besides the angry white male demographic. They can't seem to grasp that putting token minorities in largely inconsequential positions is not outreach. They also can't seem to grasp that no matter how crazy or fringe the views of a Republican like the guy in the OP, minorities will take notice of these things. I am a minority who often flip-flopped along party lines on voting state reps & presidents throughout the late 90s and into the 2000s. However, in recent years, I find myself aligning with Democrats more often than not, even though most people I know tend to be right-leaning and I tend to hold more libertarian views.
I understand that. I concede that your first offense is not in criminal statute. However, unauthorized reentry IS a crime (Title 8, Section 1326), and there are millions who have been deported only to come right back over. There are people who have been deported 11 times, many of them are part of a human/drug trafficking network. Is trespassing not a crime? Do these immigrants not cross through private ranch land? Are these ranchers not reporting harassment from these gangs? I don't care what your political affiliation is. I am not liberal, I am not conservative, I am not Republican, I am not Democrat. I have vote for both parties depending on the issue. But when it comes to illegal immigration, I call them how I see them, they are breaking the law, they have to continue to break the law to remain here by acquiring forged or stolen documents, they are criminals. Like I said, I concede that the first act of unlawful entry is not a crime, but it is still against the law. And it still affects communities, especially in South Texas and drains our public education and health care resources.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/viaUqLst9SU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Again, by your own statistics, 56% are not criminals under any definition. As for trespassing, you would need to look at state statutes to see what would make it a crime. In Texas, I can go into your front yard and break dance. It isn't trespassing until you ask me to leave and I refuse.
It was 54% (46% were deported for at least a second time) and those are just the ones who are JUST guilty of reentry, so no the remaining 54% were not necessarily innocent of a crime, they were just innocent of criminal entry. Doesn't make up for all of the other laws they broke in order to live and work in this country.
Allegedly. You see, part of what makes this country great is you have to have this pesky thing called evidence before you get to convict somebody of a crime. You could really use a remedial course in basic civics.
Illegally immigration is illegal. I am not trying to convict anyone of anything. This isn't a court of law. A murderer is a murderer, a thief is a thief, an illegal immigrant is an illegal immigrant. If your whole point is to say, but you have to prove they have committed a crime associated with immigrating illegal, no ****, I am quite aware. I was pre-law, poli-sci major. I am not a court of law. I am a citizen expressing my desire for our laws to be enforced and for people to respect them. But apparently you find it to harsh for me to call those who break our laws criminals because they haven't been convicted in a court of law yet. I don't give a damn, it doesn't change the fact that they are guilty of committing crimes. You can not live in this country under the radar without committing several crimes as I listed previously. Sorry that the word criminal offends you so much, maybe you should be more offended by those who continually break our laws and have no respect for this country. A nation without borders is not a nation at all.
Hmm. http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/08/bob-goodlatte-citizenship-dreamers.php?ref=fpa In a bad sign for reform, the Republican chairman of the House’s immigration policy committee told a conservative radio host Monday that he opposes a path to citizenship even for young documented people brought to the United States as children, often referred to as DREAMers.
A criminal organization is a criminal organization. So where's the Republican rail against WalMart, Halliburton, McDonald's, etc.
You were per-law? I had no idea. I guess I should take my almost 13 years as a practicing attorney and defer to your knowledge of the law. If you were really as principled as you make yourself out to be, you would never eat at a restaurant or get your car washed. I would hate for you to give into the hypocrisy of supporting businesses that hire such heinous criminals. You take a ridiculous position, and when called on it, you delve deeper into it rather than walk away from it like a rational person would. Now you take it a step further by attacking me personally and lobbing profanities. In short, you've got issues.
Didn't claim I knew everything, but when someone tries to jab me and tells me to take a remedial civics course, I think I've done my fair share. Didn't call them heinous. And I worked in restaurants from 16 until I graduated from college. I worked with a ton of illegals. What is ridiculous about being against illegal immigration? And when did I EVER attack you or insult you? That is is absolutely ridiculous, you and Sam have ended almost every single post with a jab at me, and you claim I insulted you? Give me a break. I guess when you disagree with someone your go to move is to insult and degrade them as if that makes your argument any stronger. Get over yourself.
I don't understand why you are bringing this up. I am totally against employing illegals. Republicans support a universal E-verify system, which would hopefully rectify what is occurring at these businesses, although they are not the only ones. I have worked in 3 restaurants from 16-22, every single one of them employed illegals. It's not right. Rep. Schock claims otherwise. Don't know what to tell you, they all don't agree, as all Democrats don't agree.
Agreed - but what is Rep. Schock's role in this? The guy I pointed out is the head of the immigrant policy team for the House GOP.
Seems like he is in favor of a legal status for those children who were brought here illegally and have been raised here. He doesn't support a pathway to citizenship. Like I said, there is definitely opposing ideas within the party. Some are hardline against any type of concession being made, but there have been numerous GOP members who have come out in support of some kind of pathway for these children. I have been to a few R meetings the last few weeks, all of the Congressional speakers have asked the audience if they would be in favor of something like this, the vast majority were okay with it. For instance, Mon night, I was at a Republican meeting of about 80 people. Most of the audience was about 65+ and pretty conservative. Congressman Burton discussed immigration and what he would and would not support. All but 3 people in the audience were in favor of a pathway to citizenship for the children. For their parents though, they would have to return to their home country, and apply for citizenship like everyone else. Then he discussed the visa programs and the arbitrary quotas by country. The problem is neither side is budging. The Senate bill isn't even Constitutional and so they won't even move it to the House, and the House is slow walking it piece by piece because they don't like everything that is in the omnibus bill.
It is revenue generating. Has to originate in the House. That's why it's still held up in the Senate and has yet to be received by the House Parliamentarian.
