




True. Here's one video where this proves this quite well: .
In the video, this woman says she sneaked through the border illegally so she could get a free birth. Of course she doesn't speak English at all. I would bet taxpayers are now paying for her kid and other kids.
Here's another video: .
They've been here 15 years, speak no English even now, have 10 kids, and both are unemployed! Doesn't take a genius to see taxpayers are paying for these people. Most people know that if you can't afford a large family, don't have one. I hope to have a family with the guy I love, but both of us know we can only support 2-3 kids and that's with both of us working fulltime and decent jobs. Yet for some reason it's always the people who can't afford kids on their own who have large families (my gripe with many who get welfare too).




Hey look someone can actually pass anti illegal immigration laws that are not racist and make sense, who knew:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/bre...enate_pas.html





^^^ well, the MA bill isn't law yet ! And despite some of the more 'practical' provisions such as ...
'explicitly deny in-state college tuition for illegal immigrants' ... meaning that illegal immigrants would get to pay the same ( but still subsidized ) out-of-state tuition rate as US citizens from other states.
'would require the state to give legal residents priority for subsidized housing' ... meaning that illegal immigrants would still be eligible for the MA subsidized housing benefit program
'require the state’s public health insurance program to verify residency through the Department of Homeland Security' ... meaning that illegal immigrants would still be technically eligible for the MA medicaid program as long as the have established a 'residence' in MA. Remember that DHS is already on record re Arizona that it, and it alone, will decide whether or not to take action when a state provides information regarding the presence of illegal immigrants in that state.
Even with these gaping 'loopholes', this bill faces major opposition. Both MA's governor and Attorney General are on record taking more 'liberal' positions. The business community also opposes this bill from the opposite end of the spectrum since it creates new burdens and risks for MA businesses who might ( inadvertently ) have illegal immigrants in their employ ( based on fake but seemingly legitimate documentation provided by those workers ).
IMHO there is really only one way to effectively deal with the illegal immigrant problem ... and it is so simple ! Institute a nationwide requirement that legal eligibility to do so be verified at local voting booths - like every other major country ! With that simple requirement in place, if politicians and voters wish to be altruistic toward illegal immigrants then so be it. But this would remove the quid-pro-quo situation of altruistic politicians exchanging social welfare benefits for illegals for the votes of illegals, and eliminate the situation of illegals benefitting from social welfare benefits being able to vote themselves continued benefits !
~
Last edited by Melonie; 05-29-2010 at 12:27 AM.
I just read the full text of the Arizona law.
There is nothing racist about it.
There is nothing that anyone who is here legally has to worry about it with it.
It does not allow police to stop you "just for being brown" or whatever. If a police officer legally comes in to contact with a person for other reasons, and has reasonable suspicion that they may be illegally in the US, they can arrest them.
How can they have reasonable suspicion?
1-Does the person have legal ID? Anytime a cop has legal contact with you for some reason, they can ask you for ID. If a person doesn't have one, that might be a clue.
2-If no to 1, does the person know anything that a naturalized citizen would know? How many amendments are in the Bill of Rights? Who is the second president? Etc.
If the person doesn't speak English, doesn't have ID, and has no idea what the Declaration of Independence is...well...
Also, Trem...the AZ bill has penalties for those that employ illegals.
If you read that bill, it is not bad at all. It's pretty reasonable, actually, given that AZ is being overrun with illegals.
Not sure how that would make a difference. Most illegals aren't here to vote, they're here to either work or get social welfare freebies. The ones who are here legally would vote for the pols that support freebies for illegals.
The best way to deal with this is....
1-Find a way to legal status for the illegals that are here now. NOT amnesty, but a combo guest worker program/path to citizenship.
2-Build a fence
3-Penalize employers that hire illegals.
4-And Mexico has to help itself. There is a reason that people are fleeing that place to come here. We need to do more to help them help themselves. Not aid, but investment would be a good idea. How, where, what...don't know...not an expert. Changing drug laws here to prevent gang violence there would also help.
Getting rid of the ridiculous war on drugs would help make Mexico less of a shit hole also. People crossing the border already risk their lives to get across the desert, i don't think a fence would deter them all that much.
You are way too optimistic about what regular americans know and don't know about their country. http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/lo...t-History.html
P.S. i do agree that your idea is not racist at all, i just think it is very very naive given that a) americans are not legally require to carry ID with them and b) the average american does not know a lot of stuff you would consider basic info. If that plan went into effect the only ones who would know that kind of info would be the illegal aliens because it would actually benefit them to learn it.




No kidding! Did you take the quiz? I did, got an 84.85%. Average score 75.9%. And that's for people taking this online after reading the article, likely above average intelligence already.
http://www.americancivicliteracy.org...rces/quiz.aspx
I remember being asked some of those questions when I was being naturalized, but I was in school and had been studying all that stuff anyway. Not sure what my parents did. I guess they studied...but when you study for a one-time test, how much of that info is actually retained over time...particularly when being grilled by an intimidating police officer.
You did better than me, i got 81.82%. I've had a few drinks though.





Very true. Even so I missed 2 of the questions !You are way too optimistic about what regular americans know and don't know about their country
And that's for people taking this online after reading the article, likely above average intelligence already
But the point is very valid ... and a bit scary ... that a large number of Americans don't really understand some of the basic principles that America was founded on ... principles that were inherently different from those of the european countries that early ( legal ) immigrants to America left behind. Nor do they understand why those basic principles were responsible for making America a success story for ~150 years. Nor do they understand that compromising those principles has arguably reversed America's success over the past ~75 years.
If the federal government was doing it's job then Arizona would not have had to enact any immigration laws of their own. But since the Obama administration is useless, Arizona had to do what they had to do. Most people outside of Arizona don't understand the significance of illegal immigration there. Illegal immigrants sneaking across the border throw garbage all over the place, ruin property, and break into houses all the time. People living along the border are scared to leave their homes after dark. Instead of fighting Arizona I think all the other states should join Arizona. There is only one way we are going to get rid of the 12 million illegal aliens in this country and prevent any more from sneaking in here. We need to get tough on illegal immigration. They shoud have started by asking every one of the protestors to prove they were here legally. I guarantee we could have made a dent in the illegal immigration population just by deporting half of the protestors.





The principles our country were founded on were basic freedoms, such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom against unreasonable searches and seizures, etc., not some far right economic ideology. America has had unprecedented success and prosperity over the past 75 years. A lot more than the previous 75 years before that.





True, but many of the freedoms we were granted are being taken away. Case in point, due to many PC police, freedom of speech is often curtailed. It's gotten to the point where people who have different views are attacked, especially if those views are conservative. I was once kicked out of a singles group because I said I find single dads who never married the mom to be morally inferior. I also was banned from another group because I said Islam is not a pro woman religion in most cases and that the 9/11 killers were Muslim. However this same group allowed people to attack Catholics as "pedophiles" but that's fine. I feel freedom speech goes both ways. If I feel a certain way it's my choice. I shouldn't have to keep my thoughts to myself just so I don't "offend" anyone. I'm not saying it's right to hurl racist comments, but if that is the way someone feels it's their right.





Sorry to hear about you being kicked out of certain groups because of your views, but the First Amendment only applies to government. The government can't arrest you and throw you in jail because of those comments you made, but private groups can still exclude you.





True, they were private, but it's part of PC gone amuck. I've become strongly anti PC because it's really the opposite of freedom of speech. I don't like groups like the KKK or the Nation of Islam but they have the right to say what they think, though I disagree.




^or even those with type 1 diabetes who can't afford insurance because the premiums are too high and the cost of strips are also ridiculously high. my brother has no insurance and type 1 diabetes with no insurance, when he did it was about 600 a month, he has a decent job but can't afford insurance like that or testing strips. but i think the insurance debate is something separate. so i guess he should die naturally too from a disease that can be managed or go on dialysis.
and trem i completely agree about ending the war on drugs.
Bookmarks