Opinion: The GOP's Short-Sighted Immigration Strategy

[targus]

And everytime and everywhere it always starts with legislation like this.

Have you even read the legislation?

However I read what Robert said and he specifically said this his point was that both groups legal and illegal would be reason enough to keep the republicans out of the white house. So when you suggested illegals only voting my assumption was based on you classifying both together. A reasonable assumption.

Not to any thinking person who reads with even a minimal level of care.

I don't know how many of you lived in a restrictive regime but I'm sure not enough to understand the seriousness of this legislation. Liberty in exchange for security ends in slavery.

Again, have you even read the bill?

 

[targus]

However I read what Robert said and he specifically said this his point was that both groups legal and illegal would be reason enough to keep the republicans out of the white house.

Politicians are kept out of office by voting against them.

This is what RobertSnow was talking about.

When I asked if he meant that illegal immigrants should vote against Republicans he affirmed that was his meaning.

So when you suggested illegals only voting my assumption was based on you classifying both together.

I suggested nothing. I asked a question.

So what do you think? Should illegal immigrants vote against Republicans.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Have you even read the legislation?



Not to any thinking person who reads with even a minimal level of care.



Again, have you even read the bill?

No. I haven't. However, the one provision I know about is enough to keep me up in arms. LEO's can on any suspicion (not defined by the legislation) of legal residence or citizenship can demand at any time to see documents (also not defined as to which documents or number required) verifying citizenship or legal status. So its not limited to people being caught in a crime. Nor is it limited to people behaving suspiciously in such a manner as to be criminal giving probable cause. All a LEO has to be is suspicious a person is illegal. With hispanics its easy because of their looks. However, it doesn't limit it to just hispanics. If your of any race a LEO can use this law to 1) detain you on your way and 2) interigate you 3) deprive you of documents.

In the law as it is before this. A law enforcement officer cannot force you to answer questions unless you are place under arrest. For this he needs just cause. A LEO cannot search you or deprive you of property unless they obtain a warrent for which they need probable cause. If you are placed under arrest a LEO can search only the immediate vicinity. However, if a LEO detains you without just cause. Searches you with out warrent and deprives you of property they have violated Federal law. This law is a way of forgoing current statutes. And the people group attacked for now are the latin's. Bad premise.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Politicians are kept out of office by voting against them.

This is what RobertSnow was talking about.

When I asked if he meant that illegal immigrants should vote against Republicans he affirmed that was his meaning.




I suggested nothing. I asked a question.

So what do you think? Should illegal immigrants vote against Republicans.

you should read the post just before this one. Of course illegals can't vote. Which is why the suggestion is ridiculous and I don't think Robert was saying that. The Legal hispanics vote. The illegals work against the republican party in that they influence by various means the legal community. Illegals can influence the rest of the population by showing suffering under the law as its misapplied. There will be an outcry from the rest of the country about human rights. Mark my words. So when you asked your question suggesting that illegal vote (ridiculous!) its seems as though you were lumping the two groups together. Illegals can only vote in the sense that dead people can vote. Illegally which hasn't stopped groups like ACORN.

 

[targus]

No. I haven't. However, the one provision I know about is enough to keep me up in arms. LEO's can on any suspicion (not defined by the legislation) of legal residence or citizenship can demand at any time to see documents (also not defined as to which documents or number required) verifying citizenship or legal status. So its not limited to people being caught in a crime. Nor is it limited to people behaving suspiciously in such a manner as to be criminal giving probable cause. All a LEO has to be is suspicious a person is illegal. With hispanics its easy because of their looks. However, it doesn't limit it to just hispanics. If your of any race a LEO can use this law to 1) detain you on your way and 2) interigate you 3) deprive you of documents.

In the law as it is before this. A law enforcement officer cannot force you to answer questions unless you are place under arrest. For this he needs just cause. A LEO cannot search you or deprive you of property unless they obtain a warrent for which they need probable cause. If you are placed under arrest a LEO can search only the immediate vicinity. However, if a LEO detains you without just cause. Searches you with out warrent and deprives you of property they have violated Federal law. This law is a way of forgoing current statutes. And the people group attacked for now are the latin's. Bad premise.

I've read the bill and you don't have the slightest clue of what you are talking about.

 

[matt wade]

No. I haven't. However, the one provision I know about is enough to keep me up in arms. LEO's can on any suspicion (not defined by the legislation) of legal residence or citizenship can demand at any time to see documents (also not defined as to which documents or number required) verifying citizenship or legal status. So its not limited to people being caught in a crime. Nor is it limited to people behaving suspiciously in such a manner as to be criminal giving probable cause. All a LEO has to be is suspicious a person is illegal. With hispanics its easy because of their looks. However, it doesn't limit it to just hispanics. If your of any race a LEO can use this law to 1) detain you on your way and 2) interigate you 3) deprive you of documents.

You need to read the bill then because every point of objection you raise is covered in the bill. Why are you going to sit here and ignorantly comment on something?

Here's some quotes from the bill for you:

Requires officials and agencies to reasonably attempt to determine the immigration status of a person involved in a lawful contact where reasonable suspicion exists regarding the immigration status of the person

Stipulates that a law enforcement official or agency cannot solely consider race, color or national origin when implementing these provisions

Specifies that a person is presumed to be lawfully present if the person provides any of the following:

Ø A valid Arizona driver license.

Ø A valid Arizona nonoperating identification license.

Ø A valid tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification.

Ø A valid federal, state or local government issued identification, if the issuing entity requires proof of legal presence before issuance.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

You need to read the bill then because every point of objection you raise is covered in the bill. Why are you going to sit here and ignorantly comment on something?

Here's some quotes from the bill for you:

You should read my post on the thread about the law itself. And note you cannot be considered from race is a stupid statement to be politically correct. According to the provision they can stop you doing anything. How then is it determined that you have illegal status? How will it work. Its based on the LEO's judgment and hes going to judge by race. Of course he'll deny it but what else do they have to go on?

 

[sag38]

You need to read the bill then because every point of objection you raise is covered in the bill. Why are you going to sit here and ignorantly comment on something?


It's called listening to some liberal pundit's talking points and then respewing them as fact.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

You need to read the bill then because every point of objection you raise is covered in the bill. Why are you going to sit here and ignorantly comment on something?


It's called listening to some liberal pundit's talking points and then respewing them as fact.

I just read the bill and not every thing I brought up is taken care of by the bill read the tread in the politics section that has the bill.
here I'll post it for you here

 

[rbell]

I said ensured his win and I would say now the GOP would not get 15% of their vote ... and that is probably optimistic. Without the Hispanic vote going heavily for Obama then Obama would not have carried Florida, Arizona and New Mexico. Obama could have won without these states, but carrying those states ensured his election.

CTB, you realize that "the hispanic vote" isn't monolithic, right?

There's a ton of difference between the "Mexican vote" and the "Cuban vote."

 

[Crabtownboy]

CTB, you realize that "the hispanic vote" isn't monolithic, right?

There's a ton of difference between the "Mexican vote" and the "Cuban vote."

True, but look at the vote in New Mexico, Florida and Arizona. However both the people legally here from Mexico and Cuba as well as Central America will not be, IMHO, favorably impressed by the GOP and its attitude toward aliens.

I had a friend tell me that one of their friends is here legally from England. The Englishman asked, "So, if I go to Arizona will I have to prove I am there legally?"

My friend replied, "Only if you open your mouth and they hear your English accent."

 

[targus]

you should read the post just before this one. Of course illegals can't vote. Which is why the suggestion is ridiculous and I don't think Robert was saying that.

What is the point in posting here if you don't even bother to read?

I asked him if that is what he meant and he affirmed it.

Seriously - change your screen name.

How about "Thinkingstuffup".

 

[Bone]

will keep the republicans out of the White House and the Congress for years to come.

Those pesky conservatives getting in the way of progressive socialism. How dare they force criminals to abide by immigration laws. It's okay if someone is breaking the laws as long as they're only doing it for their family.

Yes, that was meant to sound sarcastic

 

[NiteShift]

No. I haven't. However, the one provision I know about is enough to keep me up in arms. LEO's can on any suspicion (not defined by the legislation) of legal residence or citizenship can demand at any time to see documents (also not defined as to which documents or number required) verifying citizenship or legal status. So its not limited to people being caught in a crime. Nor is it limited to people behaving suspiciously in such a manner as to be criminal giving probable cause. All a LEO has to be is suspicious a person is illegal. With hispanics its easy because of their looks. However, it doesn't limit it to just hispanics. If your of any race a LEO can use this law to 1) detain you on your way and 2) interigate you 3) deprive you of documents.

In the law as it is before this. A law enforcement officer cannot force you to answer questions unless you are place under arrest. For this he needs just cause. A LEO cannot search you or deprive you of property unless they obtain a warrent for which they need probable cause. If you are placed under arrest a LEO can search only the immediate vicinity. However, if a LEO detains you without just cause. Searches you with out warrent and deprives you of property they have violated Federal law. This law is a way of forgoing current statutes. And the people group attacked for now are the latin's. Bad premise.

You are alert to all the what-ifs and could-happens. But what would you suggest? The state is experiencing a slow motion invasion and looking for a way to deal with it. The Administration won't help, and in fact would like to "offer a path to citizenship" for those illegals that are already in-country. Maybe you have some better plan that would work, or maybe you think there is no issue to even be addressed.

What if millions of Americans were pouring into the soverign nation of Mexico, would you think they had a problem there and would be justified in trying to come to grips with it?

 

[poodle78]

I heard on the news recently that the illegals have already started leaving Arizona.

 

[Bob Alkire]

I heard on the news recently that the illegals have already started leaving Arizona.

I don't know about that but there is about 460,000 illegals there. If they do there estimation like down here in Florida, that would be a very conservative number, there could be many more. The GOP does well with the Cuban population down here, not as well with the Mexicans and other groups.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

You are alert to all the what-ifs and could-happens. But what would you suggest? The state is experiencing a slow motion invasion and looking for a way to deal with it. The Administration won't help, and in fact would like to "offer a path to citizenship" for those illegals that are already in-country. Maybe you have some better plan that would work, or maybe you think there is no issue to even be addressed.

What if millions of Americans were pouring into the soverign nation of Mexico, would you think they had a problem there and would be justified in trying to come to grips with it?

This is what I suggest. Jail terms for employers who hire illegal immigrants. Military intervention in the mexican drug war. More boarder patrols, 24/7 electronic servaliance of every foot of boarder, repeal migrant worker welfare benefits, require emergency rooms to assertain US citizenship (provide medical care then deportation), Jail terms for landlord knowingly renting property to illegal immigrants, Housing authority verifying housing limits in all cities, have boarder states schools identify citizenship of students attending schools, charge mexico for every illegal criminal in US prisons and then withhold that amount of funding we give mexico.

I believe all of this can be done without taking away peoples rights.

 

[rbell]

This is what I suggest. Jail terms for employers who hire illegal immigrants. Military intervention in the mexican drug war. More boarder patrols, 24/7 electronic servaliance of every foot of boarder, repeal migrant worker welfare benefits, require emergency rooms to assertain US citizenship (provide medical care then deportation), Jail terms for landlord knowingly renting property to illegal immigrants, Housing authority verifying housing limits in all cities, have boarder states schools identify citizenship of students attending schools, charge mexico for every illegal criminal in US prisons and then withhold that amount of funding we give mexico.

Those are all excellent and quite plausible ideas.

 

[Bob Alkire]

This is what I suggest. Jail terms for employers who hire illegal immigrants. Military intervention in the mexican drug war. More boarder patrols, 24/7 electronic servaliance of every foot of boarder, repeal migrant worker welfare benefits, require emergency rooms to assertain US citizenship (provide medical care then deportation), Jail terms for landlord knowingly renting property to illegal immigrants, Housing authority verifying housing limits in all cities, have boarder states schools identify citizenship of students attending schools, charge mexico for every illegal criminal in US prisons and then withhold that amount of funding we give mexico.

I believe all of this can be done without taking away peoples rights.

I'm with rbell on this, sounds great. Only problem, the first time I heard people talking about illegal immigrants was back in the 50's. I think it was John Camron Swayze making light of it, on how many times it was multiple times the people were being deported. Folks back then were saying we needed to put teeth into the law. Dad use to say if we can't keep illegals out, what else will come across (drugs today).

 

[poodle78]

An immigration bill that is similar to the bill just passed in Arizona was introduced in the South Carolina house today by state representative Eric Bedingfield of Greenville county...

If a person is suspected of being in the U-S illegally, they must provide a valid South Carolina drivers license, a valid South Carolina ID card or a valid U-S federal, state or local government issued identification..

The bill has been assigned to the House Judiciary committee..

You can read bill H.4919 by clicking on the link below

http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess118_2009-2010/bills/4919.htm