Yea, because Lord knows that Americans don't free load off the government. It's a good thing we don't have any Americans living only off of welfare.
yeah..but you understand the difference right?? those people are american citizens...typically citizens of a country can and do benefit from programs initiated by the government of their country...typically we don't specifically set up welfare programs for people in other nations...we might institute some humanitarian aid...but we don't set up specific programs. we don't include them in social security, for example...
I could have and probably would have been better off. You're right. I was actually complaining more about sources in my non-Cyber life who give me unsolicited information about the guy's opinions. I guess I got a bit unnerved when I saw his name in not one but two threads on the beloved BBS. BK, I think it is hypocritical, an exploitation and a great evil for the US to preach free trade while we ourselves practice all sorts of protectionism. It especially irks me that the NAFTA trade agreement has opened the Mexican border for all sorts of commodities with one very significant exception, which is the human capital. I'm not a big free-trade advocate in the first place, but I'd like to see some money where the mouth is and that isn't happening until they open the borders to both goods and people. So while I don't generally support people in breaking the law, I do feel illegal immigration is a Mexican resistance to an unfair economic system designed to exploit them and I won't reproach them for doing what they can to defend themselves. Obviously, if I had my druthers, I wouldn't ignore the law but change it. But, I don't get my druthers and none of it is applicable to me personally anyway. If it did apply to me, I'd ignore it. There are probably some other laws I think should be ignored though I can't think of any at the moment. I'll be sure to point them out if they come up in conversation. Do you think it's wrong to disagree with and therefore ignore certain laws?
Sure I understand. But have you forgot what this country was founded on? The day we stop allowing people the chance to live in freedom, and make a better life for themselves is the day we stop being Americans.
how are we denying people the right to live here?? we've never done that and we're not doing that today!! we're simply saying that you have to go through the channels of becoming a citizen legally. that's no different today than it was on Ellis Island years ago!!
I understand that you not being from Mexico you probably don't realize what it takes to go through those proper channels . Mexico is one of the most currupt Nations in the world, and unless you have money to pay off certain officials there is no way the average citizen is going to get on that list. Also realize that most people that are comming over are very, very poor. The only way they can support their family to leave. It basically comes down to either leave or starve. Being from Texas I'm sure you've seen the reports of hundreds of Mexicans dying in tailors while trying to come accross the border. If it was really just as simple as it's made out to be don't you think they would do that instead of risking the lives of not only themselves but also risking the lives of their wives, and children.
all fair points...please don't think i'm for causing these people any harm...and please don't think i don't understand the problem. but nations simply can't be called on to provide government mandated benefits to people who are not citizens. it is simply unworkable...you can't squeeze blood from a turnip, even if you really want to.
It's not the issue of illegal immigration that bothers me when spewed forth from O'Reilly's forked tongue. He won't say it, probably would deny it, but it's the "we don't want them here" attitude that usually provokes this sort of response. I'm not asking O'Reilly to go live in poverty near the equator in a place that has no jobs to speak of, where a loudmouth demagogue like him could never even dream of getting a job stirring the emotions of other middle-class white folk (cause there ain't no middle class there, and there ain't no white folk). But empathy doesn't get him an audience, I guess.
i hear ya...i like o'reilly for the most part..find him entertaining and do find myself agreeing with him....but i too am concerned that sort of feeling is what's behind this. if that's the case, it's unfortunate.
Our government (and people) economicly benefit from illegal aliens--so I don't understand the argument. The two major social expenditures of our nation--social security and medicare, as well as smaller but not totally insignificant benefits--medicaid and welfare, do not go to illegal immigrants, and even most recent legal immigrants. The government (and us legal citizens) do not pay these things to illegal persons living in the Unites States , yet gets far cheaper roads and buildings built, and also more taxes based on corporations and companies higher profit margins they can take in. Illegal labor is without question a huge windfall to our government (most levels--with the possible exception of a few border cities and counties), most middle class persons, the wealthy, and our overall economy.
good point..hadn't considered it, desert scar...i'm clearly intellectually and factually overmatched here!! not the first time and won't be the last!!! i know we don't give a ton of benefits to illegal aliens...i guess this was on my mind because of news that California is seeking to give full state benefits to illegal aliens.
Thanks. One thing to remember is California tends to express the extreme sides of immigration issues. You have some politicians who want to do the above, you have others (a former governor) who about 6 years ago wanted to kick all children of illegal immigrants out of school (the courts intervened though).
MadMax, Just a rebound from a previous Republican governor who legislated heavily against illegal immigrants. Also, be aware that many of the illegals pay taxes for programs that they cannot receive benefits from. Sounds like another windfall for the US to me.
I was under the impression that the California Legislature legislated out there in California (along with the use of Propositions put before the voters for approval/rejection). Don't get me wrong, I personally think it should be easier to immigrate to the United States and become a citizen than it is now, but I also don't think we can lay California policies entirely at the feet of Republican Pete Wilson (regardless of how we might feel about him. Don't care for him personally).
Pete Wilson's advocacy on the issue and where he put his political muscle on the issue were very clear.
And because of that, the California Legislature and the citizens of the State of California were unable to resist and completely abandoned the separation of powers during his terms? Fact is, the Governor cannot legislate. He got no laws passed without the Legislature, a Legislature that happened to be Democratically-controlled. Say what you will about the policies if you don't agree with them, but any blame (if you wish to assign blame) cannot be entirely placed at the feet of Pete Wilson any more than any reforms you might agree with cannot be placed entirely at the feet of Gray Davis now. It takes more than just the Governor to tango.
First let me congratulate desert scar on his arguments and "facts". You know of course that there are right wing think tanks that make a living out of coming up with counter "facts" or arguments on this issue. As usual they outgun the other side by a large fator so there "facts" often become prevailing conservative wisdom. Put me down as in favor of "illegal" immigration. An open border. I would like it if it was like going from France to Germany where you just drive right through with no questions and they won't even stamp your non EEU passport e.g. US unless you ask them to, just for the souvenir value of it. I wish for instance that any American could just move down anywhere in beautiful Mexico, Canun for instance, and open up a business or get a job without having to go through paperwork, too. Of ourse I'm in favor of any Mexican moving here, too. You know what? There are other things that are illegal that I support also. I guess some of you never jaywalk or drive too fast or do rolling stops or never had a drink before 21. For those who try to justify the immigration laws why don't you try to do so with some logic other than it is illegal to violate them. Let's get back to moral relativism,. Just beause there is a law or custom in a certain society (in this case the US) does not make it moral --even if it supported by many in the society. It is flat out immoral not to let starving hungry people come up to the US to improve themselves economically. Funny how conservatives like to talk about moral relativism, but only when it comes to the few issues they care about. I would like to hear the Christian argument in favor of current immigration laws, if any.
I am a conservative and just now made a big point about how I think it should be easier to immigrate to the US and become a citizen. Jack Kemp is also a conservative who has previously talked about how immigration is not something we should be talking about as a bad thing. I know when you say "conservatives" you mean "generally speaking", but I think it important to not stereotype even when it appears that a large percentage of the particular group does happen to hold that opinion because there are those of us who consider themselves part of that group who don't hold those opinions. To me, it blunts the argument when you don't acknowledge that there are those who disagree within the group (as it can be read as being disingenuous).
