The Reason I'm against the immigration law...

[mikelewis]

Truthfully, I don't know jack about immigration issues. It's not that I don't care, it's just that I have enough to focus on and I refuse to get side-tracked on yet another travesty these Pukes have planned. I have no idea what to do about the problem of illegal immigration but I have learned one thing over these past few years, "I Do Not Trust Our Republican Government". These assholes don't give a shit about anyone but the people that pay their way into power. If there's a way to exploit these "illegals", they'll figure it out. If there is a serious immigration problem, you won't get my support to fix it until there are some decent human beings making the decisions in Washington. Those Puke bastards are going to do what there going to do and no amount of bitching or moaning is going to stop it. So this is the reason I'm against this change of policy, this and no other. I know I should get informed and rally to this cause too but good Lord, there's so much evil to go around that I'm just all filled up right now.

[Redstone]

1. Good policy. "Whatever those assholes propose, it must be wrong."

I'm NOT being sarcastic. I think, if you don't have the time to study the issue in depth (and who does?), the absolutely best course of action is to assume that whatever the Administration proposes will be a bad idea.

They've never proved your point of view to be wrong yet, have they?

Redstone

[Deja Q]

9. Whatever they do is done to tear this country apart.

It's as simple as that.

Why parrot liberal ideas and then implement them so piss-poorly? To make liberals look bad?

[Redstone]

17. Bingo!

Redstone

[Critters2]

2. Which "change of policy"?

There are three bills being debated.

[mikelewis]

6. See, I told you I was ignorant...

What I understand is... They want to turn several million people into instant felons, fill up our prisons and then deport them. My guess is that they are just doing this to force them to accept even lower wages and longer hours and then ship them home when they're used up but I don't know for sure. I knew Congress had sent a Bill to the Senate and there's supposed to be something about a Wall. Of course I can't wait to hear Vincente Fox give his "Mr. Bush, tear down this Wall" speech but aside from that, I'm about as ignorant of the facts as you can get. With 9/11, Election Rigging, The War on Terra, Iraq, Iran, Korea, China, the Economy, Katrina, on and on and on and on and on... I'm just filled up. But like I said, if you're against any Bill or change whatsoever, I'm with you 100%. If the Republicans want it, I vote No.

[Critters2]

7. You apparently are only familiar with the house bill

The two in the Senate, which will likely be combined before going to the floor, are less draconian. But none of them punish the employers who exploint the workers, and that's a problem. I was nearly sickened watching Feinstein doing the bidding of corporate ag in the committe this morning. As A Democrat, shouldn't she be advocating a living wage, rather than begging for special consideration for those who exploit farm workers?

[WilliamPitt]

13. Yeah

but she's in a tough spot as a California rep. While punishing the employers makes sense logically, she's forced to deal with the fact that the multi-billion dollar agriculture indusrty in California - the main reason that state's economy is larger than most countries - would dry up and float away on the tide if the illegal immigrants working the fields caused their 'employers' to be annihilated.

It's a straight-up jobs issue for California, from the farm workers to the truck drivers to the fast food industry and beyond. Leadership on the issues you speak of here isn't going to come from California under any circumstances. It's like asking Wisconsin to censure and obliterate cheese producers. There may be good damned reason to do it somewhere, but Wisconsin isn't going to lead the way.

For a less glib comparison, try imagining the Carolinas, Virginia, Kentucky etc. involved in a vote to get rid of tobacco crops, because smoking is horribly unhealthy and causing a crisis in health care. A good reason on many levels to get rid of tobacco, but you're not going to see anyone from those states leading the way. You'd be asking them to get rid of the central axle of their economy. Ditto California on this issue.

I wouldn't want to be in Feinstein's shoes in dealing with this decision. For her, and for California, it's a Hobson's Choice.

[Critters2]

14. Well, cheap ag labor will continue to damage Iowa and other

midwestern states. At this point, I completely despise Feinstein. Really, I've rarely been so angry.

We DO NOT have a constitutional right to cheap lettuce!

[bullimiami]

3. it seems like the house bill does a lot to punish the already exploited

but lets the exploiters, the knowing employers that take advantage of these poor people, off scott free.

republicans are total bastards. i guess they arent working on the latino vote anymore.

[johnnie]

4. I'm with you on this

I know there is no easy answer, and I have no real answer to the whole issue. I do know that I disagree with preventing anyone coming here, and I know that there must be some way to make it easier for people who want to live in America do so. But as for all the different aspects of immigration, I will say that I am not educated enough on it all to make any kind of definitive stand. I don't see it as a cut and dry issue.

I also agree with your statement "I Do Not Trust Our Republican Government", it just goes without saying that they will fuck the people over with anything they "offer".

[Just Me]

5. This wouldn't be such a big problem had the laws been enforced,...

,...to begin with. But, no,...the corporacrats have found loopholes and ways to exploit illegal immigrants and now it's blowback time.

There are people who have done the right thing, obeyed the laws pertaining to immigration and securing citizenship. It's unfair to them, it's unfair to those who were "allowed" here illegally, it's unfair to us, it's unfair to everyone other than the abusive corporacrats who profiteered all along.

Reform isn't necessary. Enforcement is. But, now, it's just too damned late to prevent this from being a major problem.

That's just my opinion.

[shamrock]

11. I agree with you Just Me.

My husband came here legally (from Peru) in 1963 (yes, I'm old). since then we have helped to bring most of his family here legally. Some of them had to wait 3-yrs., some 10-yrs,(depending on quotas) but they made it. ALL of them are against illegal immigration. I don't know what the immigration laws are now, but they used to screen people to make sure they weren't criminals and that they had a way to support themselves when they got here so wouldn't be a burden to the state. I'm not racist and I'm not implying that all illegal immigrants are criminals, but how do we know how many are? We use the quotas so that we can control HOW MANY new people come to this country each year. I't's really upsetting to keep reading comments implying that if you're against illegal immigration you are racist, and probably white. I do have a son-in-law who came here illegally from Mexico and has since become legal. I haven't discussed it with him, but my guess is that he probably supports illegal immigration.

[newscott]

8. I've got a solution for the immigration problem

Make the minimum wage for illegals $25.00 an hour. Then you'll see businesses getting behind some real reform!

:sarcasm:

[Just Me]

10. There ya' go!!!

:rofl:

[Rainscents]

12. Best plan ever!!!

:rofl:

[Critters2]

15. Call your congress members!!

[MADem]

16. Well, that would cut down on the "They took errr jeeerrrbs" complaints

Since I'll bet they'd be able to find plenty of homegrown types to work for less!