Usa Thread

[King Kung]

As you'll note from my post, I'm in favor of legal immigration. Indeed, I'm in favor of following any country's laws. I live in Thailand so I follow their laws. When I lived in the US I followed their laws.

 

What has changed?

 

If you're in a country without proper clearance, You're illegal -- you're a criminal. Yes, it's that simple. If you're in Japan or Korea or Thailand and you get caught, you're out on your ass at earliest convenience and usually asked not to return. If you sneak into the US you're victim. Liberal fucking idiocy. There are millions of good, law-abiding, tax-paying citizens who arrived legally from other countries. They were vetted and cleared. Some live in America and others have become citizens. This is good.

 

The current bullshit by liberal idiot lawmakers to look the other way admitting hundreds of thousands of illegal anchors is nothing short of criminal.

 

It's a slap in the face to every naturalized citizen who followed the rules. But Obama the homo communist doesn't care much for rules.

 

If you're not ashamed of America, you should be.

[SpiceMan]

But Obama the homo communist doesn't care much for rules.

 

I really must stop laughing at you as you are clearly pitiably insane.

[unit731]

I really must stop laughing at you as you are clearly pitiably insane.

 

Too many spirits?

[SpiceMan]

Hopefully he'll be sober and less unpleasant tomorrow but I doubt it. Murdering immigrants and dumping their bodies in the Rio Grande sounds like a psychopath.

[King Kung]

Is a figure-of-speech too much for the liberals aboard to comprehend?

You think it's a good idea to give it away?

 

Tell us why. And tell us why these criminals should be pardoned when millions before them went through the process. My wife included. Liberal idiocy and liberal white guilt is destroying America.

[unit731]

Put the Republicans in charge and all will be cleared up !

 

Thank you Ronald Reagan for clearing all of this mess up !

 

 

As the nation's attention turns back to the fractured debate over immigration, it might be helpful to remember that in 1986, Ronald Reagan signed a sweeping immigration reform bill into law. It was sold as a crackdown: There would be tighter security at the Mexican border, and employers would face strict penalties for hiring undocumented workers.

 

But the bill also made any immigrant who'd entered the country before 1982 eligible for amnesty — a word not usually associated with the father of modern conservatism.

 

LINK

[unit731]

Settle down Captain Happy !

 

"A Delta Air Lines pilot was obviously having a bad day as he communicating with Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson ATC. The pilot in command on Delta 2422 did not take well to the suggestion that he was on the wrong taxiway, and lashed out art the controller for having a bad attitude."

 

LINK

[cavanami]

This is sooooo correct...

 

[Steve]

First, you are making a blanket statement that anyone who doesn't want to shoot these people are saying they are victims. Taking some view of perhaps some immigrant advocacy group and applying it ad hoc. Everyone has said its illegal to come into this country without going through the legal route.

 

You think its so called LIberals that keeps the border porous? No, its those right wing corporations that benefit off the cheap labor. Reagan had one of the biggest amnesty programs in history...yes, that liberal, homo communist conservatives have made into semi deity status. Find me where liberal congresspersons vote against securing the border? 2000-2006, we had all 3 branches of government de facto Republcan. 911 happened so they could have used terrorism as an excuse to secure the border.Why didn't they? Wasn't liberals, explain why it didn't happen? The estimated cost to secure the border fully is about 28 billion by some estimates. http://www.businessw...der-isnt-pretty

 

Not much when you look at the entire budget and the social/infrastructure costs (schools, hosptials, etc.) of the problem. Why isn't it approved. No bill has been introduced. Why hasn't it?

 

Its not a liberal vs. conservative issue. That's the simple answer but its bullshit. Being against a strong border isa politically death sentence even for liberals. What to do once they are here is ideoogical but find me a politician who advocates not securing the border.

 

Some have went for the sucker punch reaction of blaming 'liberals'. The real truth is powerful industries WANT the border unsecure. Drugs coming across are a compromise. Agriiculture in America is corporate. Its not mom and pop farms any longer. Its big business. America has restrictions on all kinds of imported fruits and vegetables to protect corporate farms. They need these workers because a. No U.S. citizen or resident alien will do it and b. they can't afford to (in their view) to pay Americans who would. If we did, we would have to accept dramatically high food prices (unless we unrestrict imports). Construction companies. Restaurants, etc. a whole host of various industries and businesses use them from the indivdual undocumented Honduran woman to the Cargill corporation mega farm covering thousands of acres so big you would literally die trying to find your way out.

 

The unsecure border is a business issue. Pure and simple.

[cavanami]

Check the food prices in Europe, not cheap!

 

9/11....a HUGE coverup and a complete disgrace on the US politicians and other involved...

 

NYC’s Investigation of Collapse of Building 7 a Step Closer as 67,000 Petition Signatures Submitted to NYC Clerk

 

Representatives of the High-Rise Safety Initiative submitted over 67,000 petition signatures on July 3rd to the New York City Clerk's office, the New York City Coalition for Accountability Now (NYC CAN) announced. This is 37,000 more than the 30,000 signatures needed for a charter amendment to be submitted to NYC voters at the November 4 election. If passed by the voters, the charter amendment contained in the petition would require New York City's Department of Buildings to investigate the destruction of World Trade Center Building 7 — which collapsed into its own footprint at 5:20 PM on September 11, 2001 — as well as any other future high-rise collapses.

The next step for the Initiative is to gather an additional 33,000 signatures (the requisite number is 15,000) to submit to the Clerk on September 4th, according to NYC CAN. That move will place the proposed charter amendment onto the ballot in the event that New York's City Council fails to take action on the petition or votes against the proposed charter amendment. Meanwhile, the City has until August 4th to review the petition and indicate whether or not at least 30,000 of the 67,192 signatures submitted are valid signatures, as well as whether the petition complies with all the requirements of the New York's Municipal Home Rule law, pursuant to which the Initiative was undertaken.