Saturday, November 3, 2007

America´s Choices: Governor Spitzer´s Plan or Oklahoma´s Racial Profiling (Operation Wetback All Over Again)

The ANTI coalitions are brilliant. Their treacherous leaders have a faithful group of followers. They have deluged Congress´s emails, faxes and phone lines under the illusion they represent the majority of Americans. They have convinced Congress that any Immigration Reform bill under the setting sun is Amnesty.

The result: Under the Bush Administration, Congress has not passed Comprehensive Immigration Reform and now, our Nation is faced with two choices.

1. Our Nation can follow a brave plan like Governor Spitzer´s DL Plan


2. Our Nation can resort to Oklahoma´s Racial Profiling plan. (Operation Wetback all over again!) HB1804



Liquidmicro said...

What you fail to see. I recommend that you read a book by John Bowe, titled - Nobodies (at least read a little about it here and here. It might just open your eyes to some of the untruths that you keep, relentlessly, spouting.

It represents many peoples reasons/thoughts/opinions on the ANTI side as you call us.

Dee said...

Actually Liquid, I agree with the author regarding the exploitation of the undocumented workers. The PROs talk about this all the time. That is why we support Comprehensive Immigration Reform. I don´t believe many ANTIs care about this. The majority of the ANTI sites I´ve researched just want Mass Deportation. If the subject of exploitation comes up, all they respond with is, "that´s what they get for not following the rule of law." No sympathy or empathy anywhere.

Comprehensive Immigration Reform supports bringing the 12M out of the shadows towards a path to earned citizenship or Guest Worker programs. We need to make these folks legal so they are NOT exploited.

Given the Administration´s inability and the ANTI led Congress´refusal to pass any form of Comprehensive Immigration Reform, the good Governor has taken the Brave Step to start bringing the undocumented people driving out of the shadows so they will pass our drivers tests, pay for insurance and are fully documented if they drive. It is not the ideal solution, but it is better than the alternative. Nothing.

Dee said...

And again, the PRO position is:

1. Secure Borders
2. Employer Sanctions, particularly for Exploitive Employers
3. Bring qualifying 12M here out of the shadows and register them as Guest Workers and enable them to register towards a path to citizenship.

Liquidmicro said...

How can you bring them out of the shadows if they are under the thumb of these unscrupulous employers? Do you really think that they will allow them to leave? They shoot them, if they don't pay! There is no sympathy, nor empathy, because they chose to come here.

The idea from some that these immigrants are coming to America to do the jobs Americans do not want to do does not stand up to scrutiny. Drywall jobs in Los Angeles have gone to slave and day labor. Construction jobs across the country have gone to slave labor. Meat packing plants, Florida fruit farms, Texas cattle ranches... And the diabolical outcome of giving illegal immigrants driver's licenses, as in 7 of the states including Michigan, is that they will also take over trucking and distribution jobs. These aren't jobs Americans don't want to do. These are jobs businesses want illegal immigrants to infiltrate to drive down wages.

CIR is not the answer. The Governor has only increased the profit of the employer (see above paragraph) by driving down wages of the American worker.

You want employer sanctions, yet you keep giving to employers by allowing this.

Liquidmicro said...

They want either mass or attrition deportation to try to stop this from happening, as usual you have blinders on and only see from your perspective, when there are many different perspectives out there.

dianne said...

Regarding Oklahoma's law, it was put to a vote of the citizens of Oklahoma and they passed it. It wasn't enacted by Numbers USA or talk radio..the people, voting citizens, spoke. It wasn't one person voting 10 times. It was 10's of thousands of citizens voting.

Spitzer doesn't speak for the people of New York. He has singlehandedly decided that he will dictate who will get licenses or not. This is a country where individual citizens vote and make law. It is not a dictatorship.
Overwhelmingly, that is what is wrong with his proposal. He didn't listen to or even ask the people.

This is a democracy, not a dictatorship.

Liquidmicro said...

Amnesty in '86 was suppose to solve this very problem. Obviously it didn't. So you claim that this time it will, by giving the 12 - 20 Million Amnesty? CIR is/was not the answer.

Dee said...

Diane, Put to a vote of the citizens? It was Oklahoma House I804. It was passed in the OK House and Senate.

Dee said...

Here is what one OK commenter said in the comments:

This law was created by Terrill and Williamson with the help of a group named FAIR, that has recieved in the past funds from a hate group. That there is sad, why didn't they get advice from a group that supports an immigration reform.

By the way this law was not voted in by the people.

Dee said...

Reagan´s 1986 immigration bill included an amnesty. His REPUBLICAN administration voted it in. THEY did not ENFORCE any Border Laws.

The Comprehensive Immigration Reform laws included: 1. Border Security, 2. Employer Sanctions 3. Bringing the 12M out of the shadows.

Your side prefers either Mass Deportation or State Racial Profiling laws as they passed in OK.

Dee said...

So Liquid, your solution is to Mass Deport them back to the countries their parents may have brought them from 20 years ago?

That sounds like Frying Pan to Fire!!

The solution is Comprehensive Immigration Reform. Bring them out of the shadows.

dianne said...

I stand corrected, Dee. You are correct concerning Oklahoma law being crafted and passed by the legislature and governor. I had it confused with Arizona laws, where there was a public vote. Does it really matter? In both cases, the people spoke either on their own or through the people they elected. But, also, in both cases, the states were sued by hispanic groups.

The only thing that will satisfy these hispanic groups is amnesty, which is not what the citizens wanted in these states or nationally.

And, you didn't respond to my comment concerning Spitzer's declaration which he did without either a citizens' vote or a legislative action. Once again, I declare this is a democracy, not a dictatorship. What say you?

Liquidmicro said...

I will ask again, how will they come out of the shadows if they are ENSLAVED??!! The employers will not allow it to happen, and everything you advocate actually helps the employer and does nothing for the 'Illegal Immigrant' as much as you think it does. Still, you are too stubborn to accept any other idea/outcome/perspective, if it doesn't coincide with yours.

Dee said...

I think a vote does matter Dianne. As I read the comments, the people are angry. They are fighting with each other. This creates so much chaos. It looks like the minority citizens are most up in arms and in fear of racial profiling. FAIR did orchestrate this effort and thats why this bill was passed in OK. They are a powerful group and have been named by the Anti Defamation league as a Hate Group.

Dee said...

Regarding the Governor, if you the statement issued by the Dept of Motor Vehicles saying: "DMV and Commissioner Swarts for making this commonsense change."

I don´t know about your state, but my DMV frequently makes policy changes based on studies to protect the citizens. That is what happened in NY. It is the ANTI groups that are making so many inflammatory statements.

Dee said...

I believe it is the people who will suffer, just like in OK.

In NY, the citizens themselves do want to be safer and have drivers licensed and insured. You can be sure of that.

Dee said...

The reason the employers have them "enslaved" is because the live in FEAR of being deported back to their country of origin. These are the invisible chains they have on them. If they were made legal either as Guest Workers or via a path to citizens, those invisible chains disappear!

Anonymous said...

but what if we don't need them all, then many would have to be deported.

Dee said...

Are you saying you are finally ready to sit down and hash out Comprehensive Immigration Reform? Even a staunch ANTI like you? Maybe there is HOPE for the World!!

Anonymous said...

The best plan would be to deport
all of them and then decide, which
can be done rather quickly how many we need, the employers could sponser just that many to fill jobs that American citizens do not apply for. That's what I call real comprehensive reform. And absolutely, the 14th amendment must be used as it was intended to be used.

Dee said...

Congress will never ask for Mass Deportation of the 12M. Ask them. They have all said they do not want this. So we are left with status quo.

Jus Soli or birthright citizenship (14th Ammendment) will never change either. Plus, for all those you term "Anchor Babies" they are citizens. No changes to the 14th ammendment will ever, ever change that.

We need to deal with reality. Comprehensive Immigration Reform is the only viable solution.

dianne said...

Guest worker program would work provided it was just that...guest. No benefits of social programs other than emergency care and education for kids. No medicaid. No food stamps. No housing vouchers. Employer must prove no citizen worker available for jobs without depressing wages. Strict employer enforcement...fines/imprisonment for lawbreaking employers. National ID card. No voting rights for guest workers. All criminals deported including drunken drivers. Fence must be built.

In other words, here to work. Path to citizenship based on increased number of lottery numbers, but not automatic.

We cannot absorb the world.

Dee said...

Dianne, I agree. Compromise is good. That is what Congress needs to do. They need to put together a comprehensive immigration reform bill. Include Compromise. Secure Borders. Sanction Employers. And we need to figure out how to bring the 12M here, some of whom have been here up to 20 years, how to bring them out of the shadows into some legal status.

patriot said...

I was gone for a few days and I come back in here and see dee repeating herself over and over again. I see questions and remarks that weren't addressed by her just like always. Nothing changes.

She likes to claim that Americans can't think for themselves but instead are pursuaded by certain groups. You see to her it just can't be possible for a loyal American to be in favor of the rule of law or to have brains enough to know what this cheap labor is doing to American workers or how uncontrolled populaltion growth from illegal immigration affects so many things negatively in this country. Nope, according to dee, law abiding Americans are just dumb racists with no brains to think at all.

Don't be fooled by what her true motive is either. She has an ethnocentric agenda as most pro-illegal Hispanics do.

Dee said...

We´ve missed you. It has been pretty quiet without you!!

Anonymous said...

Birthright citizenship rules habe to change, not for the anchor babies here already but for future reference something has to be done.
The 14th amendment was passed due to ensure that the slaves were not denied citizenship and for no other reason.

patriot said...

anon, oh but you see dee doesn't want the 14th reinterpreted the way it was intended even though it wouldn't be retroactive. She wants as many illegal Hispanics/Mexicans to come into this country as possible and make babies so that they can become the majority citizens in this country. You must have been able to smell her agenda by now, haven't you? If not, stick around and you will find out real quick.

Dee said...

Actually, Ultima and I have a friend named GE. He was neither ANTI nor PRO. He was a very smart guy. He supported the 14th Ammendment. He had a very good argument in support of Jus Soli, the actual name for our birthright citizenship. He disagreed with your interpretation.

Jus soli (Latin for "right of the soil" or, somewhat figuratively, "right of the territory"), or birthright citizenship, is a right by which nationality or citizenship can be recognised to any individual born in the territory of the related state. At the turn of the nineteenth century, nation-states commonly divided themselves between those granting nationality on the grounds of jus soli (France, for example) and those granting it on the grounds of jus sanguinis (right of blood) (Germany, for example). However, most European countries chose the German conception of an "objective nationality", based on blood, race or language (as in Fichte's classical definition of a nation), opposing themselves to republican Ernest Renan's "subjective nationality", based on an every-day plebiscite of one's appurtenance to his Fatherland. This non-essentialist conception of nationality allowed the implementation of jus soli, against the essentialist jus sanguinis.

Jus soli is common in countries in the New World that wanted to develop and increase their own citizenry. It is also recognized in some Old World nations, most notably Pakistan.

Dee said...

Reference from Wikipedia.

patriot said...

And what is wrong with the Supreme Court reinterpreting the 14th dee so that at least one parent of the child has to be a citizen for their child to gain birthright citizenship? We don't need more citizenry. We have 300 million people now. This isn't yesterday. Many countries have that same policy in place now. Why don't you just admit it dee you want more Hispanics in this country for the reasons that I already mentioned. Just come right out and admit your devotion to your raza above your devotion to this country. Don't try to hide it. It just makes you look foolish.

Dee said...

Pat, If the change from Jus Soli to Jus Sanguinis is made and approved by Congress, then we would all live by it. For now, rule of law is Jus Soli. The problem with Jus Sanguinis, as many countries have experienced that have changed, is many children are left without a country. (those born a Jus Sanguinis country may not be deemed as citizens in Jus Soli country of their parents.) However, if it were to become the rule of law, we would live with it.

The problem you ANTIs have is, IF (and I am saying a BIG IF since Congress cannot pass anything Immigration related) IF it is changed, you will NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER revert the citizenship status of those you term "anchor babies." I suggest you stop using that racist term because they are, afterall, ALL CITIZENS!!

;patriot said...

Mexico has dual citizenship so when two Mexican parents are here illegally and their child is born on our soil, they are not a child without a country. They are a Mexican citizen. I am sure there are other similar guidelines in other countries who have the one parent citizen policy too. Besides it is the fault of the parents that entered a country illegally. No nation should have to pay for their law breaking by giving their child citizenship in that way.

I know of very few anti's who think that disallowing birthright citizenship under the bill in the House right now that thinks it will be or should be retroactive. I already stated that in the post you replied to, so why did you bring it up? Reading comprehension?

I'll use any term I like for children born here of illegal parents! It doesn't take away from the fact that they are citizens. The term is meant to describe what the parents did. They anchored THEMSELVES unto our country by doing this. Racism? How can it be racism when parents of all ethnicities here illegally are doing this?

Page Hits