Standing ovation

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by joeydb

While it's true that the minority party often gains seats in the midterm elections when the president and congress are controlled by the majority party, the degree to which this change is likely to occur will surpass any precedent.

I was commenting more on the overruling of public sentiment on passing the healthcare debacle which the majority of Americans oppose, and now applauding the words of a foreign president against our country and one of our states, when the overwhelming majority of Americans support that law.

The Democrats are out of touch, and that's what will burn them in November, over and above the trend which you have correctly pointed out.

i just wish the people in charge of planning the republican fall campaign shared your arrogance. they just placed their entire focus on a single house seat in a district that voted for mccain in 2008. and lost it.

if there was a tsunami coming, wouldn't we have found out about it last tuesday?

the wet dream scenario you have for november doesn't appear to have any basis in reality. republicans will pick up seats. that's true. they've had 2 disastrous election cycles so there are more democratic incumbents. and incumbents will pay the price for a bad economy.

healthcare votes will cost 2-3 freshmen dems their seats. and as much as immigration energizes the republican base, it does the same for hispanics.

how big republican gains will be has a lot more to do with what happens between now and november than what happened in 2009.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

I think the law allows unequal treatment of citizens (based too much on race.) I don't want someone like Andre Ethier getting stopped just because he's half Latino. Whatever measures used to stop Illegal Immgration needs to be very forceful. We need to punish those who hire them. Even if the illegals have fake papers to show, employers should be fined if it's found that THEY HAVE AN ILLEGAL WORKING FOR THEM. That means you better be pretty damn sure that your employee is a citizen. Matter of fact, why take a chance? Guess who's gunna get hired? Those with the best English skills. Those who people are pretty damn sure are citizens. That's not racial profiling. It's letting Americans be responsible for who they employ. Illegals aren't gunna be responsible. You need to put the pain on those who have the most to lose.


And later has this conversation with Wolf Blitzer:

BLITZER: So if people want to come from Guatemala or Honduras or El Salvador or Nicaragua, they want to just come into Mexico, they can just walk in?

CALDERON: No. They need to fulfill a form. They need to establish their right name. We analyze if they have not a criminal precedent. And they coming into Mexico. Actually...

BLITZER: Do Mexican police go around asking for papers of people they suspect are illegal immigrants?

CALDERON: Of course. Of course, in the border, we are asking the people, who are you?

And if they explain...

BLITZER: At the border, I understand, when they come in.

CALDERON: Yes.

BLITZER: But once they're in...

CALDERON: But not -- but not in -- if -- once they are inside the -- inside the country, what the Mexican police do is, of course, enforce the law. But by any means, immigration is a crime anymore in Mexico.

BLITZER: Immigration is not a crime, you're saying?

CALDERON: It's not a crime.

BLITZER: So in other words, if somebody sneaks in from Nicaragua or some other country in Central America, through the southern border of Mexico, they wind up in Mexico, they can go get a job...

CALDERON: No, no.

BLITZER: They can work.

CALDERON: If -- if somebody do that without permission, we send back -- we send back them.

BLITZER: You find them and you send them back?

CALDERON: Yes.

[Antitrust32]

LOL @ the mexican president double standard.

I really dont understand the fuss about this law. especially since racial profilling is strictly forbidden in the law.

I also find it hilarious that good ol' Janet and Eric can publically critisize the law when and then turn around and admit they havent even read the darn law. typically liberal bs.

I have a much different view of illegal Mexicans in arizona than most all republicans do. I'm all for amnesty. But if the state wants to actually inforce the laws, I can see no problem with that either.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

I think the law allows unequal treatment of citizens (based too much on race.) I don't want someone like Andre Ethier getting stopped just because he's half Latino. Whatever measures used to stop Illegal Immgration needs to be very forceful. We need to punish those who hire them. Even if the illegals have fake papers to show, employers should be fined if it's found that THEY HAVE AN ILLEGAL WORKING FOR THEM. That means you better be pretty damn sure that your employee is a citizen. Matter of fact, why take a chance? Guess who's gunna get hired? Those with the best English skills. Those who people are pretty damn sure are citizens. That's not racial profiling. It's letting Americans be responsible for who they employ. Illegals aren't gunna be responsible. You need to put the pain on those who have the most to lose.


And later has this conversation with Wolf Blitzer:

BLITZER: So if people want to come from Guatemala or Honduras or El Salvador or Nicaragua, they want to just come into Mexico, they can just walk in?

CALDERON: No. They need to fulfill a form. They need to establish their right name. We analyze if they have not a criminal precedent. And they coming into Mexico. Actually...

BLITZER: Do Mexican police go around asking for papers of people they suspect are illegal immigrants?

CALDERON: Of course. Of course, in the border, we are asking the people, who are you?

And if they explain...

BLITZER: At the border, I understand, when they come in.

CALDERON: Yes.

BLITZER: But once they're in...

CALDERON: But not -- but not in -- if -- once they are inside the -- inside the country, what the Mexican police do is, of course, enforce the law. But by any means, immigration is a crime anymore in Mexico.

BLITZER: Immigration is not a crime, you're saying?

CALDERON: It's not a crime.

BLITZER: So in other words, if somebody sneaks in from Nicaragua or some other country in Central America, through the southern border of Mexico, they wind up in Mexico, they can go get a job...

CALDERON: No, no.

BLITZER: They can work.

CALDERON: If -- if somebody do that without permission, we send back -- we send back them.

BLITZER: You find them and you send them back?

CALDERON: Yes.

The amount of racial profiling that would occur if your employer scenario was enacted would dwarf the supposed racial profiling that this law supposedly causes. For if you want to enforce draconian penalties for employers for hiring illegals, many will simply stop hiring anyone that remotely looks or talks like the stereotypical illegal. Not to mention that your typical business owner does not have any formal training in determining the authenticity of immigration documents. Having had plenty of experience in dealing with both legal and illegal documents, the ones that are being used nowdays all look good. It used to be fairly easy to seperate the bad ones from the good ones but even then unless the document was laughlingly fake (like spelling errors or signatures in crayon) legally we are not allowed to deny someone a job based on their documents.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The amount of racial profiling that would occur if your employer scenario was enacted would dwarf the supposed racial profiling that this law supposedly causes. For if you want to enforce draconian penalties for employers for hiring illegals, many will simply stop hiring anyone that remotely looks or talks like the stereotypical illegal.

This is not racial profiling. Everyone has to produce documents (not just Latinos.) If someone's English is as Ethier's is, then employers won't bother him. What it does is put an emphasis on English skills. Not just Latinos' English Skills. Anyone's English Skills. The only way to stop Illegal Immigration is for it to be painful to get caught. Since we don't seem willing to give the Illegals pain, the only alternative is to punish employers that break the law by hiring them. No Gold = No Gold Rush.

[Riot]

Whatever measures used to stop Illegal Immgration needs to be very forceful. We need to punish those who hire them. Even if the illegals have fake papers to show, employers should be fined if it's found that THEY HAVE AN ILLEGAL WORKING FOR THEM.

The amount of racial profiling that would occur if your employer scenario was enacted would dwarf the supposed racial profiling that this law supposedly causes.

You guys are both unawares of the Arizona law (around for some time now) strictly prohibiting hiring of illegal immigrants, with tough sanctions and fines for doing so?

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Riot

You guys are both unawares of the Arizona law (around for some time now) strictly prohibiting hiring of illegal immigrants, with tough sanctions and fines for doing so?

This is a National problem, and laws are only followed when they are enforced.

[Princess Doreen]

Rep. Tom McClintock - R/CA - response to Mexican President Calderon.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JDo36xPYgE

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

This is a National problem, and laws are only followed when they are enforced.

The entire City of Chicago is an immigrant safe zone meaning Chicago cops, inspectors, social service workers etc. etc. are ordered not to question immigration status. Without enforcement there might as well be no law.

Incidentally the City of Chicago also saw fit to re-interpret the 2nd amendment outlawing a citizen from owning or possessing a handgun (even in their own residence). For that I HOPE they are severely punished very, very soon.

PS Il. Senator Roland Burris was found to have a gun in his house but wasn't punished after giving the excuse he didn't know it was there. An extra spoon or fork I can understand but forgetting you have a gun? Must be pretty gangsta' if that is true!

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

You guys are both unawares of the Arizona law (around for some time now) strictly prohibiting hiring of illegal immigrants, with tough sanctions and fines for doing so?

I am aware of federal laws that knowingly hire illegals. The onus is only on the business owner if he knows he is employing illegals. Proving that isnt so easy if he has accurately filled out I-9's.

[Danzig]

honestly, i don't know why anyone concerns themselves at all about illegal immigrants. neither party wishes to do a damn thing about it. both sides benefit from illegals. the govt conceded that with illegals paying in, but not taking out of social security, is one reason the program remains solvent. as for them costing us with welfare and the like, i doubt many illegals ask for public aid, as the last thing they want or need is to let anyone know they're around. is it an issue? obviously? does anyone know how to fix the issue? doesn't appear to be the case.

Originally Posted by Danzig

honestly, i don't know why anyone concerns themselves at all about illegal immigrants. neither party wishes to do a damn thing about it. both sides benefit from illegals. the govt conceded that with illegals paying in, but not taking out of social security, is one reason the program remains solvent. as for them costing us with welfare and the like, i doubt many illegals ask for public aid, as the last thing they want or need is to let anyone know they're around. is it an issue? obviously? does anyone know how to fix the issue? doesn't appear to be the case.

Nobody has the balls to fix the issue. We're being controlled by a bunch of MIKE THE EUNUCHS.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Danzig

honestly, i don't know why anyone concerns themselves at all about illegal immigrants.

DUH...Almost every other country cares. For some reason, we aren't supposed to care? The benefits aren't evenly dispersed , but the costs are. Schooling kids isn't cheap. Mainly, this is a sovereign country, and we have every right to decide how people can become citizens, and what to do with people who illegally stay here. Dems are just as backward on this as the Reps are on healthcare. One of the goals of well-intentioned programs should be to actually improve as a country. Illegal Immigration makes it impossible to do that. If we have poor people, then we need to work on that problem. You simply can't do that if you're constantly increasing the amount of poor people by allowing illegal immigration. It shows me that most DEMS aren't really interested in improving a problem in their country. They're acting irresponsibly. Everything about illegal immigration is irresponsible. We need to solve the problems in our own country. Illegal Immigration is about taking on the problems of other countries. Now, there's nothing wrong with taking on the problem (poor people in other countries) as individual Americans. However, this should not be a problem our country's Gov't has to pay for.

[Nascar1966]

Originally Posted by Danzig

honestly, i don't know why anyone concerns themselves at all about illegal immigrants. neither party wishes to do a damn thing about it. both sides benefit from illegals. the govt conceded that with illegals paying in, but not taking out of social security, is one reason the program remains solvent. as for them costing us with welfare and the like, i doubt many illegals ask for public aid, as the last thing they want or need is to let anyone know they're around. is it an issue? obviously? does anyone know how to fix the issue? doesn't appear to be the case.

I care about the illegals. Everyone's taxpaying money is being undeservingly being wasted on the thugs. They want to live in this country yet they disrespect our flag and they don't want to learn our lanuage. Maybe we should start burning the Mexican flag? You have pregnant women crossing into this country giving birth in the US hoping that they can also become a legal US citizen next thing you know grandma and grandpaw want to come to this country. Our taxpayer's money can be put to better use than supporting these worthless unintelligent illegals. That child that was born in this country should not be able to become a US citizen.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I am aware of federal laws that knowingly hire illegals. The onus is only on the business owner if he knows he is employing illegals. Proving that isnt so easy if he has accurately filled out I-9's.

No, I am talking about Arizona state law. Nothing to do with federal law.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

No, I am talking about Arizona state law. Nothing to do with federal law.

No I have absolutely no expertise in Arizona state law, I suppose that disqualifies me from commenting further.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

i just wish the people in charge of planning the republican fall campaign shared your arrogance. they just placed their entire focus on a single house seat in a district that voted for mccain in 2008. and lost it.

if there was a tsunami coming, wouldn't we have found out about it last tuesday?

the wet dream scenario you have for november doesn't appear to have any basis in reality. republicans will pick up seats. that's true. they've had 2 disastrous election cycles so there are more democratic incumbents. and incumbents will pay the price for a bad economy.

healthcare votes will cost 2-3 freshmen dems their seats. and as much as immigration energizes the republican base, it does the same for hispanics.

how big republican gains will be has a lot more to do with what happens between now and november than what happened in 2009.

Guess what? The momentum is not anti-incumbent. It's anti-liberal, anti-taxes, anti-debt. The Dems are going to get pounded. Not 2-3 freshman seats. Big losses. You can bet on it.

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Guess what? The momentum is not anti-incumbent. It's anti-liberal, anti-taxes, anti-debt. The Dems are going to get pounded. Not 2-3 freshman seats. Big losses. You can bet on it.

i wasn't suggesting a 2-3 seat loss overall. that would be a liberal wet dream on par with your conservative wet dream. i was talking about 2-3 freshman seats in competitive districts where dems got elected on obama's coattail that'll probably go republican as a result of a vote cast in favor of healthcare. my point was that healthcare will be a non-issue outside of that small impact.

and so far as your take on the country's mood, what can i say? from your mouth to the republican congressional campaign committee's ear. i couldn't possibly hope for anything more.

they, unfortunately, probably noticed the pennsylvania special election tuesday where a dem was again elected in john murtha's anti-abortion, pro-gun district. the one that voted for john mccain in 2008.

if you live in a vacuum only getting news from sources that reinforce your opinion, you'll believe all the echoes must be reality. i won't try to convince you otherwise.

the election will be whatever it is. but your certainty over a result that's still almost 6 months off as well as the detailed reasons for that "red tsunami" is the kind of arrogance that costs seats.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

they, unfortunately, probably noticed the pennsylvania special election tuesday where a dem was again elected in john murtha's anti-abortion, pro-gun district. the one that voted for john mccain in 2008.

yes a Dem who campaigned as an antiabortion, progun, anti healthcare bill, anti tax and trade Dem. Those kind of dems arent so bad if they actually govern as they campaigned. Of couse we all know how that goes...

At least the people of PA were smart enough to put Arlen out of our misery. Maybe Andy Reid will give him a job fetching donuts?

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

yes a Dem who campaigned as an antiabortion, progun, anti healthcare bill, anti tax and trade Dem. Those kind of dems arent so bad if they actually govern as they campaigned. Of couse we all know how that goes...

At least the people of PA were smart enough to put Arlen out of our misery. Maybe Andy Reid will give him a job fetching donuts?

and sestak's a stronger candidate in november. i'm not predicting a slam dunk win because i don't own the same crystal ball joey has but i thought the senate primary was another positive for the dems in a swing state.

and there are plenty of anti-abortion, pro-gun dems, chuck. even anti-healthcare bill ones.

you're the party of strict ideological discipline. no one runs around yelling "dino" other than scuds.