Thursday, May 11, 2006

Senators Agree on Reviving a Broad Immigration Bill

"it could be the most comprehensive rewrite of immigration laws since the so-called Simpson- Mazzoli bill 20 years ago."
Associated Press--

a broad immigration bill that could provide millions of illegal immigrants a chance to become American citizens they hope to pass before Memorial Day.
"The agreement brokered by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., and Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., breaks a political stalemate that has lingered for weeks while immigrants and their supporters held rallies, boycotts and protests to push for action. "

Part of the goal to reaching an agreement is knowing who will be negotiating a compromise with the house. "it could be the most comprehensive rewrite of immigration laws since the so-called Simpson- Mazzoli bill 20 years ago." Said Senate majority leader Bill Frist.

" Business and labor, Democrats and Republicans, religious leaders and the American people strongly support our plan to strengthen borders, provide a path to earned citizenship for those undocumented workers who are here and put in place a realistic guest worker program for the future," Kennedy said. "

read the above paragraph carefully... when they talk about what the American people want... it's amazing, how they know "what the American people want" and how it always seems not to jive with what I hear.
"They've also had to contend with fallout from opposition to the House bill that triggered nationwide protests that drew hundreds of thousands in Los Angeles, Chicago and Dallas and hundreds more in other cities and small communities. "

I am so sorry... you have to "contend with the fallout from opposition" with a bill to prosecute people who are literally invading our country.

I'm embarrassed... let me say that again... I am ashamed of the way that our government who we pay to protect our homeland has sold us out.


6 comments:

jeff said...

Green ink,
Try and move to Mexico and make the same demands that the illegal aliens are making here.

You'll get booted out so quick your head will be used as a prop on the next Exorcist movie.

Anonymous said...

Umm. guess it depends on what poll you look at.
Gallop Poll (as reported in the Washington Times) November 2002
67% believe the government should not make it easier for illegal immigrants to become citizens.
CIS/Zogby Poll. Attitudes Toward Amnesty. September 2001
33% of those Hispanics surveyed said they would be less likely to vote for Bush in 2004 if he supported an amnesty.
Zogby Poll. 4/11/06
A majority of Americans said they oppose amnesty for undocumented workers from other nations who are already residing in this nation, the survey shows. While 52% said there should be no amnesty, 32% said they would favor amnesty for such people.
Depends on how the pole is worded.
Most of those that vote to give immigrants here a path to citizenship respond that they also insist that the immigrant learn English, assimilate, and go through proper channels to become citizens over a period of many years and seal off our border.
As far as "they aren't 'invading our country' you are just dead wrong. You don't speak for me and you don't have the authority to give away what you don't own.
It never ceases to amaze me how liberals always want to give away things that aren't theirs. Make land use decisions on land that's not there's. Heavy taxes on someone other than them so they can give it to someone else. Their charity always begins at someone elses home.

Anonymous said...

Poles are for naked women to play on and polls are for people who don't get out into the streets and look at life themselves. Rights are for people who are citizens. It's that simple.

Anonymous said...

I used to work for a research company, and we did political polls. they say theres a + or - 3% accuacy in those polls, but really the results come from a lot of people who are home to answer the phone. retired folks, and people without jobs. so I believe those results are not a reflective sample of the population.

other polls specify certain criteria before you can even take the poll. these screening questions often include race and income criteria. polls can be steered this way and those results are not a true sample of the population either.

on one hand what are we going to do they day they kick out all the illegals? who's going to pick our produce and dry clean our clothes? dont EVEN tell me you think americans, no matter how poor, will step up and do those jobs, even at the rate illegals get paid. the farms around here have "u-pickers" they pay people by the basket to pick the produce. the only people working there are illegals and kids too young to work at mcdonalds. they do the same with moving irrigation pipes, and most other farm duties. if they pay by the job, they dont have to pay a fair wage.

but illegals shouldnt be here at all, they should have to leave. they should be captured and returned, or better yet shot upon crossing the border.

what are we going to do? either way were screwed.

Robin said...

What is true that the accuracy of polls depends on the way the poll was asked, I think the main point here is that the "invasion" or "threat" to life as we know it in the United States is he a simulation of immigrants who are crossing our borders illegally forcing their culture and language on as well at the same time, they are refusing to properly assimulate into our culture.

It is merely a question of legality.

In my personal opinion, logistically, I think it is impractical to be able to deport ALL of the illegal immigrants that currently reside in the United States. George Bush's "guest worker" [amnesty] program I think would be more successful if part of the provisions of the program is that it follows the current INS regulations for citizenship. E.g. background check, read and write English, etc.

There is a difference between "rights" & privileges. Everybody has "civil rights" just by being in the United States. However, the "privileges" of being a citizen of the United States are being demanded of people that have no right to be here.

Robin said...

"Human rights"... that is a good question. What are they?

"If your family needs to be fed, you don't wait for years to see if your citizenship requests will be granted. You find a job."
that is understandable.

However, you are telling me that you would leave your own country just to find a job?
That you would risk bringing your family to another country "illegally" knowing the risks of being caught and separated from your family?
And what about the children? The ones who have to suffer because you [parents] drug them over here illegally.

As far as forcing their culture and language on us, look around you. More and more jobs in the United States are requiring that you speak Spanish just to qualify for that job.

Other jobs are starting to require their employees to learn Spanish or lose their job.

In fact, the state of Oregon will give you a 5% bonus if you speak Spanish.

So why Spanish? Why not Vietnamese, Japanese, German?

The answer to that is because the United States is being heavily populated by "illegal" Hispanics who have entered our country through the backdoor and refuse to follow our laws and requirements to become citizens.

And what about the hungry immigrant?

There are visas and other methods of attaining a temporary work status currently on the books.

Again, the whole issue is about legality, not race.

Should we give a blanket amnesty to those who broke our laws by coming here illegally? No.

Do we send ALL illegal immigrants back home? Ideally, however, not practical.

In reality, just because of the sheer numbers of illegal immigrants, a more practical approach would have to be offered.

My idea of a practical approach would be...
#1 on the top of the list we close our borders tight FIRST! [When you have a leak, the first step in fixing it is to shut off the source]
#2 illegal immigrants who have verifiable proof that they have been living in the United States for five years or more with no criminal history would be ALLOWED to apply for citizenships, however, they must meet ALL CURRENT INS requirements to become a citizen, or be able to meet them within a reasonable amount of time, failure to do so would mean deportation and fines.
In a sense, it would be like a learner's permit for drivers license. If you really want to drive, you have to go through all the steps to obtain your license.
My theory at least, is that you are in one instance rewarding them for ducking the law for five years, however, you are offering them a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to make good a mistake.
#3 a hard date to apply for the "permit" would be enforced. Applications will not be accepted for the program after this date.
#4 NO FUTURE APPLICATIONS WILL BE EXCEPTED AND ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ENTERING THE COUNTRY ILLEGALLY AFTER THIS DATE WILL BE CONSIDERED FELONS!

Our government would have to make it clear that this is a once in a lifetime opportunity and will not be offered again in order not to repeat the previous offer for amnesty by a previous president in reduced the huge influx of the illegal immigrants trying to get in on this program.

We can be firm, yet compassionate.