Miltie needs a rant!!

[Hmph]

jackass Vicente Fox's comments - notice the comments in bold. he speaks as if Mexico IS the U.S.'s problem. but how come we're not a bail out problem for Canada, China, India, Europe or any other nation doing a hell of a lot better than we are??

Mexico's Fox: We have 'obligation to opportunity'

Sunday, April 2, 2006; Posted: 10:58 p.m. EDT (02:58 GMT)

(CNN) -- Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said Sunday that he expects an immigration bill to be passed by week's end, but comments from other U.S. lawmakers left it difficult to predict what kind of legislation might ultimately win passage.

CNN's Wolf Blitzer spoke Sunday with Mexican President Vicente Fox about his country's role in the debate and the results of a summit last week in Cancun, Mexico, with President Bush and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

BLITZER: Help us understand what, if anything, was accomplished in Cancun on this very sensitive subject of illegal immigration into the United States.

FOX: Wolf, how are you? Good to be in your program.

This meeting in Cancun was extraordinary. It held a lot of accomplishments; to begin with, to get the friendship and the personal relationship stronger, especially with the visit of the prime minister from Canada, Stephen, because [becoming acquainted] at [the ancient Mayan ruins at] Chichen Itza and the meetings gave us the opportunity to really exchange about different subjects.

On the subject of migration, a bilateral subject among United States and Mexico, we had the opportunity to review where is the issue right now, where is the debate.

And it's clear that the issue is [in the] U.S. Congress, so the ball now is there. And we fully respect the sovereignty of the U.S. Congress. And I know they will take the most appropriate decision for both, for the betterment of the United States and for Mexico.

We understand the issue of migration as a responsibility that we share, both countries, but we have to deal with it until we can have a flow of migrants or the situation of migration in United States handled with an orderly manner, with a legal manner, secure manner.

And we are here to cooperate and do our part of the job and exercise our clear responsibilities that we have on the issue, which is building up opportunities for our people in Mexico.

That is what we want at the very end. And we're trying hard. We're working on this, bringing in new jobs, granting new opportunities to people in their communities. So this is the situation right now.

BLITZER: ... The president of the United States, he wants you to take more aggressive steps to stop the illegal immigration into the United States. Are you planning on taking any steps along your northern border with the United States to do that?

FOX: Absolutely, yes -- No. 1, by creating opportunities in Mexico. Right now, on the border there's 100,000 spaces available for jobs on the Mexican side. So we work hard on the opportunities.

No. 2, we work hard on the enforcement of the law and the security on the border. We work very closely together ... with the Homeland Security Department in the States, with Mr. [Michael] Chertoff.

We work on an everyday basis to make that border secure, to make sure that we comply with human rights respect, and we're doing the same actions and programs on the southern border. Because today, we have a strong migration coming from Central America into Mexico illegally, and then trying to move up to the United States.

Now, for instance, last year we withheld 240,000 Central Americans, and we sent them back to their communities, to their nations. So we're working on all aspects.

First, our obligation is to grant opportunities to our people in Mexico. No. 2 is to do our part of the responsibility in complying with the law and, yes, trying to retain our people here in Mexico.

BLITZER: The House version [of immigration legislation] would make illegal immigration a felony, would require employers to verify workers' status.

It would place serious fines for hiring illegal immigrants. It would build a 700-mile fence along part of the U.S.-Mexican border. It would not allow any guest worker program. The president of the United States wants a guest worker program.

What do you think of this 700- mile fence that so many members of the U.S. House of Representatives and some in the Senate would like to build?

FOX: Wolf, the specifics are hard to meet at this point of time. But let me tell you that I fully agree that it has to be a comprehensive resolution that, first of all, has to do with security, has to do with a border that really is sufficient -- but also has to do with the jobs that these people [are] doing in United States.

They are being hired by somebody. [The] U.S. economy needs this energy, needs this working force. At the same time, we know that we have to do the part of our responsibility that has to do with building up opportunities in Mexico.

Now, how we manage the border, it has to be No. 1 with security. And migration should be under the rules of a legal situation, has to be with order, the flow of migrants, and has to be secure, respecting their human rights.

And if we reach that situation, that desired situation, then there's no need for walls or there's no need for other actions now.

We are not just going to sit down here in Mexico and say, 'Oh, very good, we have now the opportunity to send people there.' No way. We understand our responsibility. ...

BLITZER: Mr. President, did you know there's serious criticism that elements of your government have actually encouraged illegal immigration from Mexico into the southern part of the United States for whatever economic or social reasons?

What do you say to those critics?

FOX: I deny that. That's not true. We work hard on the opposite, in trying to build up opportunities here in Mexico.

As a matter of fact, our people don't want to be there as long as they have opportunities here.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/ ... index.html

and building up opportunities WITH OUR MONEY!!! this is total

and it's total that he feels the U.S. badly needs them. however, that also confirms how stupid they are. if they're doing the work they THINK americans won't do, why are they low-balling themselves. if they're in such high demand for "special" work, their costs should be higher if harder and illegal to get.

I still say pay them exactly what they'd earn in Mexico to make it not worth their time and call it a day!

[MsNikaPooh]

They aren't doing what we won't do. They are doing what we would ask to be paid fully for. Where else can you get a couple of guys to build your deck for $100 and they are happy to do it. Ask a contractor and you can expect to pay 10 times that for a bs job.

[Hmph]

yeah but the person that hires them can't file an insurance claim if something happened when using non-licensed contractors. and the person who hired them could be sued if someone is injured in any way from negligent work.

they're so quick to cut corners, but we know what happens when you do that: someone ends up paying for it elsewhere.

[Hmph]

businesses speak up about immigration reform

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12167709/

Immigration Reform: Why Business Could Get Burned
One new proposal could cost employers $12 billion in compliance

By Richard S. Dunham
Updated: 12:00 a.m. ET April 4, 2006

How important is immigration to the business community? Very. On Mar. 16, Bill Gates trekked to Capitol Hill to tell key leaders of both parties that immigration is Microsoft's No. 1 issue in Washington. "If we hope to maintain our economic and intellectual leadership in the U.S., we must renew this commitment," Gates said in an earlier letter to lawmakers. "Unless there is reform, American competitiveness will suffer as other countries benefit from the international talent that U.S. employers cannot hire or retain."

Both Sides Now

Gates and his fellow CEOs have good reason to be nervous. Politicians in both parties are seizing on public concern about 12 million illegal immigrants living in the U.S. to craft legislation limiting cross-border mobility for skilled and unskilled workers alike. And while corporations are accustomed to anti-business potshots from the Left, they are now fighting a defensive battle against angry populist Republicans who want to seal the border and punish companies that employ illegals. At the Conservative Political Action Conference in February, Representative Tom Tancredo [R-Colo.] won a standing ovation for skewering companies that profit from imported labor. "The conservative movement can either be the voice of principle or it can be the voice of the Chamber of Commerce," Tancredo roared. "But it cannot be both."

Facing rhetoric like that, many corporations feel pressured. By opposing the GOP's anti-immigrant faction business runs the risk of ushering in more Democrats in the 2006 elections. But Tancredo and his allies pose a more immediate threat to business' long-term need for a steady stream of foreign workers.

The immigration hardliners want serious penalties to make businesses think twice before hiring immigrants. Legislation approved by the House in late 2005 would make it a felony for businesses to hire illegal workers: Companies that incorrectly fill out certain paperwork on employees could be fined up to $25,000. "It doesn't take too many of those [fines] to drive a small business out of business," says John Gay of the National Restaurant Assn.

Business is doing better in the Senate. Corporate lobbyists believe they have the votes to water down the tough financial penalties and win their top priority, a guest-worker program that lets foreigners take jobs Americans don't fill.

But the prospect of a House-Senate negotiation has the business community on edge. A compromise is likely to include language requiring companies to confirm the legal status of all employees and prospective hires. Angelo I. Amador, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's immigration policy director, says that plan would be a bureaucratic nightmare costing employers at least $12 billion for compliance. The current federal pilot program to confirm whether employees are legally in the U.S. has been unreliable, he adds.

Yet business must tread carefully to avoid angering GOP immigration foes. "I'm worried that the clearly harsh voices in the Republican Party are the loudest voices," says former House Majority Leader Dick Armey [R-Tex.], leader of a pro-business coalition. Business frets that populism could foster a GOP faction hostile to such corporate priorities as trade liberalization and tax breaks. Already, the political schism has sparked showdowns in Republican primaries between anti-immigrant candidates and business community favorites. Among the contests: the San Diego district long represented by convicted ex-congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham and the districts of retiring Republican Representatives Butch Otter of Idaho and Jim Kolbe of Arizona. Business is digging in for a long battle. "

This is a long-term issue, because this is a workforce issue," says Bernadette Budde, senior vice-president of the Business Industry Political Action Committee. "We're going to have to find labor someplace." But corporate critics don't cut companies any slack. "The illegal immigration lobby in the U.S. is big business," says Tancredo spokesman Will Adams. "They have an addiction to cheap labor."

With struggling President Bush mired in an unpopular war, GOP discord over immigration is just one more threat to the party's grip on Congress this fall. Demo-crats, says independent political analyst Charlie Cook, "have settled into their seats with popcorn to enjoy the spectacle of Republicans ripping themselves apart." That's a lot easier than coming up with a solution to this divisive issue.

[Hmph]

the slave masters have themselves some new slaves

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/06/ ... index.html

Senate reaches 'breakthrough' on immigration

Thursday, April 6, 2006; Posted: 12:55 p.m. EDT (16:55 GMT)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Senate Republicans and Democrats closed in on a last-minute compromise Thursday on legislation opening the way to legal status and eventual citizenship for many of the 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally.

Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, said he had been assured President Bush supports the compromise measure. Bush, standing before television cameras after an appearance in Charlotte, North Carolina, said he was pleased that Republicans and Democrats were working together.

"I appreciate their understanding that this needs to be a comprehensive immigration bill," the president said. "I recognize that there are still details that need to be worked out. I would encourage the members to work hard to get the bill done prior to the upcoming break."

As outlined, the measure would provide for enhanced border security, regulate the future flow of immigrants into the United States and offer legalized status to the millions of men, women and children in the country unlawfully.

"We've had a huge breakthrough" overnight, said Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tennessee.

Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, agreed, but cautioned that the agreement had not yet been sealed.

Even so, the presence of both leaders at a celebratory news conference underlined the expectation that the Senate could pass the most sweeping immigration bill in two decades, and act before leaving on a long vacation at the end of the week.

The developments marked a turnaround from Wednesday, when it appeared negotiations had faltered. The key sticking point involved the 11 million illegal immigrants in the country, and the struggle to provide them an opportunity to gain legal status without exposing lawmakers to the political charge that they were advocating amnesty for lawbreakers.

While final details were not available, in general, the compromise would require illegal immigrants who have been in the United States between two years and five years to return to their home country briefly, then re-enter as temporary workers. They could then begin a process of seeking citizenship.

Illegal immigrants here longer than five years would not be required to return home; those in the country less than two years would be required to leave without assurances of returning, and take their place in line with others seeking entry papers.

Not everyone was satisfied. A spokesman for Sen. John Cornyn said the Texas Republican was opposed to the measure. There was no immediate reaction from GOP Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona or Jeff Sessions of Alabama, two other prominent critics of earlier proposals dealing with illegal immigrants.

Beyond the illegal immigrants, there were other thorny issues to be clarified. Senate leaders had yet to publicly unveil draft legislation to make sure that only legal workers were hired in the future, for example.

Nor was it clear what type of assurances, if any, Democrats had received from the White House and Republicans about compromise talks with the Republican-controlled House later this year. The House has approved legislation limited to border security, and while GOP leaders have signaled support for a broader measure, Democrats have expressed concern in recent days that they will be pressured to make unacceptable additional concessions to achieve a final compromise.

The closed-door negotiations proceeded as the Senate went through the motions on a test vote on an earlier version of immigration legislation.

Democrats needed 60 votes to prevail, and as expected, they fell far short. The attempt gained only 39 votes, while 60 senators were opposed.

In an ironic juxtaposition, the vote unfolded at the same time Frist, Reid and more than a dozen other senators were celebrating the breakthrough.

you know that expression, be careful what you ask for....

since we're going back in time w/criminalizing abortions, I won't be surprised in my lifetime to see a part of slavery make a comeback. remember folks like Erica Jong says she live w/out a nanny (remember the mammys the slavemasters couldn't live w/out) and for working in the fields, don't be surprised to see a new face of overseers.

[MsNikaPooh]

Was about to say and slave traders but thought about how some of them get here in the back of big semis.

[Hmph]

check out this new article, and a few comments about it

NAACP, Obama Call for Earned Citizenship for Undocumented Immigrants
Source: New America Media
by Michael H. Cottman
04/07/2006

The NAACP is calling on Congress to enact sweeping immigration reform that does not include enforcing a mass deportation campaign and a provision to build a 700-mile security fence along the U.S.-Mexico border.

"Our nation's immigration policy must be consistent with humanitarian values and with the need to treat all individuals with respect and dignity," Bruce Gordon, president of the NAACP, said in a statement.

"We must move away from the politics of ostracizing immigrants and instead look at the demographic shifts and needs of our nation in a larger context," Gordon said.

A U.S. House bill passed in December -- which has drawn fierce opposition from Latino groups -- would make illegal immigration a felony, impose new penalties on employers who hire illegal immigrants, require churches to check the legal status of parishioners before helping them and erect fences along one-third
of the U.S.-Mexican border.

Last month, more than 500,000 people gathered in downtown Los Angeles to protest the House legislation and tens of thousands rallied in Phoenix and Milwaukee. In Detroit, protesters waving Mexican flags marched from the southwest side of the city where many Hispanics live.

Senate majority leader Bill Frist said the Senate will likely begin debating the issue this week and craft its own immigration legislation, a prospect that has heightened the discussion about immigration reform and renewed calls for protests and letters to congressional leaders.

Democrats like Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) say immigration reform is a divisive issue but contend that lawmakers should work collectively to assist immigrants living in the U.S.

"I know that this debate evokes strong passions on all sides," Obama said in a statement to BlackAmericaWeb.com. "The recent peaceful but passionate protests of hundreds of thousands around the country are a testament to this fact, as are the concerns of millions of Americans about the security of our borders."

"But I believe we can work together to pass immigration reform in a way that unites the people in this country," he said, "not in a way that divides us by playing on our worst instincts and fears."

Obama said the Judiciary Committee’s bill would strengthen enforcement, "but while security might start at our borders, it doesn't end there."

He said millions of undocumented immigrants live and work in America.

"We need to strike a workable bargain with them," Obama said. "They have to acknowledge that breaking our immigration laws was wrong. They must pay a penalty, and abide by all of our laws going forward.

"But in exchange for accepting those penalties," he added, "we must allow undocumented immigrants to come out of the shadows and step on a path toward full participation in our society. In fact, I will not support any bill that does not provide this earned path to citizenship for the undocumented population."

Gordon said that legislation to address genuine immigration reform should include proposals that would allow people to earn the right of citizenship through hard work, the commitment of several years and meeting several monetary, security and related requirements. He said the NAACP "strongly opposes any efforts to criminalize undocumented immigrants."

Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) said while he believes border security is essential, Republicans have passed a series of immigration bills over the years that have been ineffective.

"Let me say at the outset that Democrats believe that a strong border security policy is an absolute necessity for this nation," Conyers said during a recent speech on the House floor. "We must ensure that terrorists do not simply walk into this country and lurk in the shadows of our society until they attack our people."

"But this bill is mostly not about border security," Conyers added. He said Republicans repeatedly use the fear of terrorism to push their anti-immigrant agenda.

"We do not need to adopt policies of jailing, deporting, and criminalizing immigrants to protect ourselves from the real threats of terrorism," Conyers said. "More importantly, we are giving the American people a false sense of security if we tell them a bill like H.R. 4437 will help keep them safe."

Political commentator Earl Ofari Hutchinson said civil rights leaders overall have been "virtually mute" on the subject of immigration. He said there are no position papers, statements or press releases on the websites of the NAACP, National Urban League or SCLC on immigration reform. And, he added, "The Congressional Black Caucus hasn’t done much better."

"The CBC and civil rights leaders tread lightly on the immigrant rights battle for two reasons," Hutchinson said in a recent column. "They are loath to equate the immigrant rights movement with the civil rights battles of the 1960s. They see immigrant rights as a reactive, narrow, single-issue movement whose leaders have not actively reached out to black leaders and groups."

Meanwhile, the NAACP released a set of principles for revised federal immigration legislation:

-Support of family unification by not subtracting the visas given to immediate relatives of U.S. citizens from visas available to all family immigrants thereby reducing the backlogs in which people wait for many years to reunite with their closest family members;

-Support of protections for agricultural workers and a path to legal permanent residency and citizenship for college age students;

-Support of due process rights for immigrants facing deportation, including access to fair, humane and common-sense procedures such as a speedy trial and adequate counsel;

-Opposition to efforts to penalize anyone for providing humanitarian assistance to their fellow human beings, regardless of the citizenship status of the person in need of help;
Opposition to any efforts to require, encourage or deputize state or local police to enforce federal immigration laws;

-Opposition to Department of Homeland Security detention of individuals indefinitely;

-Opposition to low-level Citizenship and Immigration Service personnel exercising unreviewable authority to judge good moral character of an applicant for citizenship;

-Opposition to mandatory detention of undocumented immigrants without individualized consideration of whether detention is necessary.

"Problems with the immigration system cannot be resolved without looking at the larger economic needs of the nation," Gordon said, "such as the creation of job training programs and small business programs, as well as federal education assistance so that all Americans can have enhanced opportunities."

Some of the comments to article

This is a case where I disagree w/ Obama
By: ReigneMan
The United States is a rich and prosperous nation. Having said that, it is not and should not be up to us to feed the poor, starving masses of the world. Extending liberal residency policies to people who have already broken the law to be here is not right to native born Americans, and is n ot fair to all those people who have used legal means to become a citizen of this country.
While Obama claims that we can pass a bill on immigration that unites this country, the truth of the matter is we should not be caring about the feelings of a bunch of criminals. Those 500,000 or so odd people should have been arrested and deported. They have no legal right to be here, so why they are protesting to live in a country in which they do not belong is the ultimwte in lunacy. That is likened to someone proetsting their "right" to keep money they have stolen. You have no claim to that money, and for you to asssume that you have any right to it is a testimony to your own arrogance, and nothing else.
Another point to ponder is the fact that many illegals claims to do jobs that "native Americans will not do" is countered by the reasons why so many of us are not willing to do these jobs: Ordinary Americans do not do these jobs any longer because;1) illegals have undercut the wage so much that it is no longer profitable to dso these jobs, and;2) many business owners have become spoiled with underpaying the illegals, so they will no longer hire native born Americans to do these jons anymore anyway. They have created a need for their services by being here illegally, undercutting the minimum wage and then some of then do end up on welfare and food stamps, even though they haven't paid a dime in federal taxes at all. That means they are getting something for nothing. How is that fair to us? Why should you profit from illeaglly creating a need for yourself that should not exist and would not exist if you were not here?
Then too, isn't it odd that when one of these beggars commits a crime in America, their homeland that they desperately wanted to escape doesn't seem like such a bad place to be anymore? If you're so gung-ho about being an American, why don't you want to deal with American justice when you violate one of our laws? Apparently, you want the wealth America has to offer, so long as you are exempt from the rest of this nation's laws.
There is but one solution, and that is mass deportation. If you cannot come into this country legally, then clearly you are not fit to work in this nation. If you broke the rules to come into this country, what should make us believe that you won't break any more laws when you come over here? You people are a plague on this nation. If the Congress of the United States is smart, they will send you a strong clear message: Rulebreakers are not allowed in America. Go home.

Posted: Saturday, April 08, 2006 19:12 EDT 1 reply
immigration
By: spanish_rosa
It hurts to know that minorities as similar as we are can be against each other. Do not forget the struggles we all go through. People say latin people are nasty and drunk, do they know they are stereo typing? Do we as minorities not remember how it is to be stereo typed? Yes borders should be controled. But like the article said we need to find a way to work with the illegals already here instead of attacking them. Do you know how much money would be spend on deporting illegals. Money that could be used for more important things like our Education system or finding new alternatives for oil. The main reason illegals come here is to work. 75% of crimes are committed by citizens and residents of this country. Do you really believe that by trying to eliminate on culture everything would be find, that wouldnt be possible. Crimes comes in all colors and sizes. If would be to this countries benefit to give the illegals here penalites for breaking the law and send them on the path to get residency or citizenship that way the govenment will accumulate more money that can be put to better use. We are a civilized nation with the freedom of speech. I hope that people will research a topic before speaking out for or against it.

Posted: Saturday, April 08, 2006 16:56 EDT 1 reply
BOGUS!!
By: Boxx2005
If you are an ILLEGAL, you are sucking off my tax dollars to get an education and medical attention. Most of them do LOW wage jobs and get paid under the table so they pay NO TAXES!!

Its unfair for an Illegal to come here and hide for a few years then try for citizenship, when my brothas and sistas in countries like Somalia wait their turn and come here honestly and DO IT THE RIGHT WAY!!!

I say build 2 walls 15' high. Concrete and Tatanium center 7' feet apart with HEAVY DUTY barb wire in between the two. If they can get through that without dying, then they deserve to be an AMERICAN..

Posted: Saturday, April 08, 2006 15:57 EDT 0 replies
Immigrants
By: clarasfuller
We must be very careful about lending unqualified support to illegal immigrants. As it stands, there are millions of undocumented immigrants that are swarming areas that can barely accommodate them. Although many pay taxes, the American tax-payers are seeing their property taxes increase in order to help educate the children of illegal immigrants. There are a number of aliens being arrested for drug dealing, homicide, and other crimes which is placing added strain on the criminal justice system (translators needed, more police officers needed, larger jails, etc.). While some are being deported, they often find their way back to this country and enter the same towns. Also, in addition to competing with others for low-wage jobs, BOTH Political Parties are competing for the Hispanic vote and are AFRAID to control illegal immigration!! Finally, Blacks are finding themselves challenged by both economic and political threats from the increased Hispanic population. Cities such as New Orleans and others with Black mayors will have to make major adjustments in sharing already scarce resources with a growing Hispanic population which may NOT be as accommodating to our needs. Increased Nationalism with the possibility of racial/ethnic conflict is looming large.

LIVING CONDITIONS
By: 2booteelicious
I REALLY HATE THE FACT THAT THEY DIDNT PASS THAT LAW....IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD IT USED TO BE ALL NICE WITH FLOWERS AND BIRDS BUT NOW FORGET ALL OF THAT. THERE USED TO BE LIKE 2 HISPANIC FAMILIES LIVING ON MY BLOCK AND OVER THE YEARS THE WHITE AND BLACK PEOPLE MOVED OUT TO GO DOWN SOUTH CAUSE THERE WAS TOO MANY HISPANIC'S. AT FIRST WE DIDNT REALLY CARE BUT THESE PEOPLE ARE NASTY THERE DRUNK 24-7 THEY FOLLOW YOUR LIL CHILDREN AROUND TRYING TO MOLEST AND RAPE THEM. THEY HAVE NO RESPECT THEY WOULD FALL ASLEEP IN THE ROAD, CLIMB ON THE TOP OF YOUR CARS, AND PEE IN PUBLIC AND NOT TO MENTION IT SEEM LIKE PEOPLE MOVE IN EVERY WEEKEND THEY BRING ROACHES AND RATS. ITS EMBARISSING I CANT EVEN BRING MY FRIEND TO MY HOUSE WITH OUT THEM WATCHING YOU AND WHISTLING IT'S NASTY. ONE TIME THEY EVEN TOOK IT AS FAS AS RINGING MY DOORBELL AT 2 IN THE MORNING TO ASK FOR A BEER OPENER. OK YES SOME OF THEM ARE HERE TO WORK BUT NOT ALL OF THEM SOME OF THEM JUST SIT THERE AND GET DRUNK AS SOON AS THEY WAKE UP. IF YOUR NOT A
"C-I-T-I-Z-E-N" OF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. YOU DONT GET RIGHTS LIKE UNITED STATE CITIZENS. POINT BLANK
PLUS THEY ALL DRIVE NICE CARS CAUSE THEY LIKE LIKE 20 TO A HOUSE AND NO PARKING SPOTS.. MY OWN CO-WORKER WHO IS HISPANIC TOLD ME WITH HIS OWN MOUTH THAT HE HATES LIVING AROUND SPANISH PEOPLE CAUSE THERE TOO DIRTY ! BUT WHY DO I HAVE TO SUFFER ??

Posted: Saturday, April 08, 2006 14:16 EDT 2 replies
Obama has a point...
By: Alittlefaith
B4 I read this article, I stood strong on sending immigrants back. However, after reading Obama's statement...I think we should bring them out of the shadows, and introduce them to our society. No matter what regulations we have that may hinder them from crossing the border...they WILL make a way to get here (always have). That's why it is important to find a middle ground that will unite our lands because that IS what it's about. I beleive in unity, I just don't want to see Americans losing even more jobs due to the unity of the two lands. Times are just as hard for Americans here (based on our way of living) as it is for others in their home lands. The difficulties do differ (no doubt), but all countries have issues.

Posted: Saturday, April 08, 2006 05:41 EDT 0 replies
NAACP
By: john_jetter
Wrong organization for that cause. What it actually tells me is; all these years of saying those letters in the minds of white america it still does not mean *bleep* to them. But i also feel if that is the solution to the problem they should monentarily support it's causes and pay their damn taxes and follow the same laws.

Posted: Saturday, April 08, 2006 03:44 EDT 0 replies
On further review, I don't think that the NAACP is off the mark here
By: ttime1
Meanwhile, the NAACP released a set of principles for revised federal immigration legislation:

Support of family unification by not subtracting the visas given to immediate relatives of U.S. citizens from visas available to all family immigrants thereby reducing the backlogs in which people wait for many years to reunite with their closest family members;
Support of protections for agricultural workers and a path to legal permanent residency and citizenship for college age students;
Support of due process rights for immigrants facing deportation, including access to fair, humane and common-sense procedures such as a speedy trial and adequate counsel;
Opposition to efforts to penalize anyone for providing humanitarian assistance to their fellow human beings, regardless of the citizenship status of the person in need of help;
Opposition to any efforts to require, encourage or deputize state or local police to enforce federal immigration laws;
Opposition to Department of Homeland Security detention of individuals indefinitely;
Opposition to low-level Citizenship and Immigration Service personnel exercising unreviewable authority to judge good moral character of an applicant for citizenship;
Opposition to mandatory detention of undocumented immigrants without individualized consideration of whether detention is necessary.
"Problems with the immigration system cannot be resolved without looking at the larger economic needs of the nation," Gordon said, "such as the creation of job training programs and small business programs, as well as federal education assistance so that all Americans can have enhanced opportunities."

by the way, the day we don't need sites such as blackamericaweb.com is the day I know we are qualified to effectively handle illegal immigration.

and I stopped supporting the NAACP in the 90s when a black woman member signed false documents on behalf of whites who openly admitted lying against a black person. and she was a prominent member of the NAACP. I'll never forget her name either.

[Hmph]

SINCE THE UNITED STATES IS AT WAR in case they weren't paying attention!!!! I have an why don't these 10 million plus illegal non-taxpaying residents, free school and services having immigrants march to Iraq and demand what they want since they're determined to enter another country illegally and tell it what to do and what they want!

then the war will be over, they would have contributed greatly and they'll have a new country where they'll have lots of work to do to help rebuild Iraq for low wages.

or initiate an illegal alien draft immediately and start shipping them there, male and female, and let's see who quickly deserts the U.S.

I wish millions of us could enter a country illegally and tell it what to do daily! but realistically we know that's not possible. and there are immigrants from other countries (Italy, Somalia, Kenya, Japan) trying to legally come here but have to wait their turn.

border crossers just want the money/jobs in the U.S., there's very little concern for this country

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/10/ ... index.html

National immigration marches kick off in Georgia

Monday, April 10, 2006; Posted: 10:49 a.m. EDT (14:49 GMT)

ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- Thousands of marchers in white T-shirts filled the streets of an Atlanta neighborhood, one of dozens of nationwide immigration rights protests kicking off Monday.

Demonstrators in nearly 70 U.S. cities will be voicing support for an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants.

On what is dubbed a "national day of action for immigration justice," Atlanta's was one of 30 marches in the South alone as focus on the immigration issue turned from Congress to the streets.

Other large protests are planned in New York, Philadelphia, Indianapolis, Seattle, Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles.

They follow similar rallies Sunday in Dallas, Texas; St. Paul, Minnesota; Des Moines, Iowa; Long Island, New York; and Goshen, Indiana. (Watch opposing protesters chant at each other at an Indiana march -- 1:00)

The two-mile Atlanta march was in support of immigrant rights nationally as well as in protest of state legislation awaiting Gov. Sonny Perdue's signature, The Associated Press reported. If signed, it would require that adults seeking many state-administered benefits prove they are in the country legally, according to AP.

Carlos Carrera, a construction worker from Mexico, held a large banner that read: "We are not criminals. Give us a chance for a better life," AP reported.

In Manhattan -- where three rallies are set Monday -- demonstrators expect to cross the Brooklyn Bridge and march through Chinatown and Greenwich Village before converging on City Hall Park.

Last week's Senate legislation was hailed as a breakthrough before the compromise drafted by Republican Sens. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Mel Martinez of Florida failed to gain enough support in a vote. (Full story)

On Sunday, lawmakers traded blame for the impasse, but they agreed on one thing: The result may be no legislation at all.

"I hope it's savable," said Sen. John Kerry, D-Massachusetts. "I hope politics doesn't get in the way."

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, said he is optimistic but added, "I'm always optimistic."

Specter, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, told "Fox News Sunday" that "there's a real risk of significant political fallout here."

Both parties are looking to win over Latinos -- the nation's fastest-growing voting bloc -- in this year's midterm elections.
Divisions within GOP

Republicans are divided over two of the Senate bill's provisions -- a guest-worker program for noncitizens and a process allowing illegal immigrants to pursue legal status to stay in the country and obtain citizenship.

Some Republicans fear provisions helping illegal immigrants could damage the party's image as being tough on national security issues.

While some GOP Senate leaders have expressed support for provisions allowing illegal immigrants to stay in the country and obtain citizenship -- an idea espoused by President Bush -- others flatly reject it.

"A temporary-worker program that might be useful to supply labor needs in our country, when they exist, should be exactly that -- temporary -- so that when the work is not available for them, you haven't turned them into permanent legal residents and thereby created a situation where you have foreign workers here but no job for them," said Sen. John Kyl, R-Arizona.

Democrats largely support laying out an avenue to citizenship.
House bill focuses solely on security

But even if the Senate manages to pass a bill after a two-week recess for Easter, another uphill battle would follow: having to merge it with the bill passed by the House.

The House immigration legislation -- which has drawn fierce opposition from Latino groups -- calls for building a 700-mile-long security fence on the U.S.-Mexico border and for making illegal immigration a felony.

A joint committee of members of the House and Senate would have to hammer out a compromise.

"I think we can resolve the differences, and we can have a strong immigration-reform bill," House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Sunday on ABC's "This Week."

But Boehner offered no indication how such a solution would be possible.

"I'm for securing the borders and enforcing the laws," he said. "Until we do that, if you try to create a guest-worker program, all you're doing is inviting more illegal immigration."

Rep. Peter King, R-New York, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, also indicated he would not support such legislation now.

"In 18 months or two years, we can go back and address that issue," King told "Fox News Sunday."

"But first we have to secure the borders. Otherwise we're just going to be taking a bad situation and compound it."

But Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Illinois, cast that position as unfair and impractical. "We do need reinforcement, but we also need compassion. We need a comprehensive bill, one that takes into account that there are 11 million undocumented workers currently in the United States," Gutierrez told NBC's "Meet the Press."

"The only sane, sensible, compassionate thing to do is to integrate them fully into the fabric of our society. ... And they're necessary to the economic well-being of our country. So let's include them."

CNN's Allan Chernoff contributed to this report.

[miltie]

Lots to absorb - and valid points from both sides of the fence. Some, of course, are very obviously ignorant.

I honestly don't think lawmakers are going to push the issue for deportation because paying low low wages (dirt wages, in fact) keeps costs down for consumers and that's what they are seeing. It doesn't do much good for the unemployment rate of LEGAL citizens. Perhaps if certain employers weren't so cheap and greedy and paid better wages, more folks who collect welfare, wic, etc. might be more keen to go out and get a job.

But hey, if I was perhaps unskilled, or a single mom, or had a low level of education and could not find a decent job with benefits to support myself and/or family, you're damn right I'd stay at home and collect because it sure beats working for minimum wage when you can collect more off the gov't.

But then again, if we're saving so much money as a nation by putting illegal mexicans to work for shit wages at shit jobs, why can't employers increase the wages for other jobs?

I believe that the gov't should put the smack down on ALL employers who knowling hire illegals. ESPECIALLY Temporary/Staffing Companies.

There are several at my place of employment, but the reason WE can't get in trouble is because these folks are sent over from the Staffing Company. We do not issue these employees checks, we pay the staffing company to pay them. So, in effect, it's the staffing company's problem. They're not looking at documentation properly and probably don't give two shits as long as companies like the one i work for keep paying them!!!

[Hmph]

actually a study was done, the wages don't have to be low. higher wages would only affect consumers by a matter of pennies a month or 100.00 total per year.

all the crap you're hearing about low wages keeping costs down is . the low wages are keeping giants richer, and allowing smaller businesses to make more profits, but they're not necessarily sharing those profits w/all employees.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/ldt.html

check out transcripts regarding immigration from CNN's Lou Dobbs

the way immigration is set up now is nothing more than a new form of slavery or indentured servitude.