That wasn't what you said. You said you wanted to bet that Americans commit more crimes than illegals. If you're going on straight numbers of course they do. There are simply more legal citizens than illegal ones. That would make you Captain Obvious and would do nothing to further your point. So I must assume you meant percentage wise. In which case, you loose because, while Americans do commit crimes, every illegal immigrant is a criminal all day, every day, absolutely 100% of the time. Are you saying that all Americans are criminals all day, every day, 100% of the time?

But aren't you deft at trying to change the subject. You prefer diversion rather than actually dealing with the issue.

Fess up, you loose the bet. Take it like a man.

-S-

 

First question is if someone from latin America wants the job can they immigrate legally? Not realistically because we don't allow that. So if they want the job which is certianly open to them with no real penealty to the employer they have no other choice but to come here illegally.

So what is your solution to the immigration problem? Are you contending all we have to do is shut down our borders and all these problems will go away?

 

I don't know, I'm afraid. It's not my area. That's why I pay taxes, so people smarter than me can figure out these problems. But I do know that working on the problem is a helluva lot better than the do nothing approach, which is what you appear to be advocating.

-S-

 

That they can come doesn't mean they're allowed to. Immigration is not a right, no matter how much they want the job. You want in, you do what every other sovereign nation does, you apply for a visa. If the country doesn't issue visas, well tough shit. You do not, no matter how much liberal apologizing you do, no immigrant, no matter how needy and impoverished, does not have the right to thumb their nose at the laws our nation is founded on. As the article says, we are first and foremost a nation of laws.

-S-

 

No ShakeZula because in fact we Americans are by in large criminals all day everyday. We exceed the speed limits and jaywalk. We cheat on our taxes. We download copyrighted material. We don't seperate our trash. We steal news and infomation and don't pay our taxes and tolls.

So what I am saying is that those scare tactics propaganda you put up are lies and myths. Is that simple enough for you.

 

Get real ShakeZula the jobs are being offered and they are getting paid for it aren't they. Isn't that what they would call an "attractive nusaince."

See you still just want to look at the poor people trying to better themselves.

So let's do stick to the subject. HOw to you propose to seal our borders? What do you propose to do with businesses that hire illegal aliens?

And what do you propose to do with the corps that are left rotting in the fields like they were earlier this year?

 

What a cop out ShakeZula. Here's the real deal. Ever since prohibition the united States Government has found it to be quite impossible to seal our borders.

Shit we couldn't even keep German Sailors from walking the streets of New Orleans during world war II.

So Shake we've got to come up with something else don't you think? Or is the only border you're worried about the southern border?

 

And when we're caught, we're penalized. What I can't understand is why you don't want the same thing for illegals. If you're advocating for no laws, just come out and say your an anarchist, that would make things a lot easier. You're double-talk in trying to find ways for illegals to break the law and not be punished is just silly.

It's not a scare tactic, it's exposing a problem. Was Watergate scare tactics, I wonder?

-S-

 

My neighbor leaves his door open. Does that give me the right to walk in to his house, raid his 'fridge, prop up my feet on his coffee table and order some pay-per-view? No, of course it doesn't.

And did you even read the article I posted about the crack-down in Ohio? It says what they're starting to do to business hiring illegals. You raid them and fine them. Enough that it hurts. In the article that I've referenced twice now, it says that fines are currently so low that some businesses just factor them in to the cost of doing business.

-S-

 

Hell ShakeZula I'm all for punishing them. Let's see you, the courts, the cops INS, the states or even militias do it. Want to round them all up and deport them fine. How to you propose we do that?

And vigilantes are the ones who don't use the laws ShakeZula.

 

Also, I suppose a quick solution would be to actually use National Guard troops on the border. It'd cost a lot of money and would be difficult do with troops stretched so thin, but you step up patrols, leave fewer windows open illegals to cross, and you start making a difference.

I would also start billing Mexico for the cost of dealing with their immigrants. You either send them a bill or withhold the amount from the aid we send them. Get them to police their own border and it cuts our workload in half.

And please tell me you're not trying to compare a few german spies during WWII to millions of illegals flooding across the border. Please. And was that southern border crack another racist jab? Should I ignore it? But no, I mean both borders. The Canadian border is a different sort of problem, but one that still needs to be dealt with.

-S-

 

Also, I suppose a quick solution would be to actually use National Guard troops on the border.
We've got the National Guard on the Border now and if I'm not mistaken two of them are being charged with murder.

It'd cost a lot of money and would be difficult do with troops stretched so thin, but you step up patrols, leave fewer windows open illegals to cross, and you start making a difference.

Make you a deal here ShakeZula. If you're willing to bring our troops home from Iraq and everywhere else in the world I'm willing to station them at the borders. But let's not forget those eastern and western borders.

I would also start billing Mexico for the cost of dealing with their immigrants. You either send them a bill or withhold the amount from the aid we send them. Get them to police their own border and it cuts our workload in half.

Now we are not going to be doing that are we. First Mexico can't afford it. Second they might decide to sell their oil to someone else. And most importantly that would be bad for business.

And please tell me you're not trying to compare a few german spies during WWII to millions of illegals flooding across the border. Please. And was that southern border crack another racist jab? Should I ignore it? But no, I mean both borders. The Canadian border is a different sort of problem, but one that still needs to be dealt with.

What I'm telling you is the obvious truth. That we have never been able to seal our borders no matter how hard we have tried. And that is especially true now that our economy depends on the trade, and weither you admit it or not the fruits of the labors of illegal immigrants.

Now, let's say we do by some miracle shut down all our borders. What do you propose we do with the 8 to 10 million in the country now, keeping in mind that some estimates are that up to one third of our population immigrated illegally?

And ShakeZula here's something I'll bet you'll be surprised to know. See the republicans already soloved the immigration problem back in the 1980's and that is the reason you will hear them use every thing else except the "A" word (amenesty) to try and keep their greedy agri/corporate interests in cheap labor.

See they already granted amenesty once and promised to seal the borders then. I'll look it up for you.

 

Plus, if you get Mexico to police the border, that's more jobs in the Mexicans' hands. It works.

 

First, I already used the example of an attractive nusciance. In my hometown we have a lot of absentee landowners. Their property gets run down and invested with dogs cats rodents. Kids and other's break into the places and steal or sometims get hurt.

What can the town do. They have laws against maintaining an attractive nusiance and can fine the landowner for not investing in their property or selling it. But like you said, American companies can figure the fines for hiring illegal aliens right into the cost of doing business, so they do.

Do you suppose any of those businesses contribute to political campaigns?

And you're example of a fridge is a poor one. Let me change it a little bit. Let's say its broke and you just leave it outside your house on your property. What would happen then Shake?

 

ShakeZula I did a little search and found what former Simpson thinks is needed for us to secure our borders and halt illegal immigration. What do you think?

*not_secure_link*abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=politics&id=5376394

To former Senator Alan Simpson it's all too familiar. He authored the 1986 Immigration Reform Bill that gave three million undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship, but did little or nothing to stop four times as many from entering illegally. Simpson now admits his bill was a failure.
Alan Simpson, former senator: "Because we never got a more secure identifier in it. We had it in there."
But Simpson says at the eleventh hour the far left and the far right ganged up on the national I.D. card provision of his bill claiming that it would be a slippery slope towards fascism.
Alan Simpson: "How it would affect the minorities of the world and would be Nazi Germany returned. The House, it's eleven o'clock at night, they bought it."
Simpson believes the current reform legislation has a much better chance because the idea of a tamper proof I.D. system now isn't as unpopular.
Alan Simpson: "Nobody has written a single note about the identifiers that are in these bills -- retina scans, fingerprinting. Haven't seen an editorial anywhere in the United States about the slippery slope. I'm waiting for it, but it's not going to come because of 9/11."
The terror attacks of September 11th certainly did change that thinking. Tonight a vote is expected on the Senate floor to end debate and move the legislation forward. A similar vote failed this morning.

 

It is. Atleast It was on the news a while ago..

 

What news? I think I must have missed that one.

 

Micheal Savage said he saw it on the news. Check out michealsavage.com
It will probably tell you where.
He's always been truthful from what I have seen and I listen to him all the time.

 

YOu mean this Michael Savage?

*not_secure_link*abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=politics&id=5376394

 

Sorry, wrong site.

*not_secure_link*www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-07-07-talk-host-fired_x.htm