More Reasons to Just Say NO to SAVE ACT (Gestapo Bill). Even ANTI´s agree:AMERICAN POLICY CENTER OPPOSES S.A.V.E. ACT
By Tom DeWeese February 24, 2008 NewsWithViews.com February 22, 2008
Mr. Roy Beck Numbers USA 1601 N. Kent Street Suite 1100 Arlington, Virginia 22209 Dear Roy: As we agreed during our conference call in December, I want to fulfill on my obligation to address our concerns with Sections 201, (Mandatory Employment Authorization Verification through the E-Verify System) and 203 (Establishment of Electronic Birth and Death Registration Systems) of the SAVE Act (Secure America Through Verification and Enforcement Act. H.R. 4088) ...Our differences are in the need for government data banks which snare all Americans in their nets in order to find the few law breakers. I fully accept your claim that you aren't interested in creating a National ID. I accept that your motivation is to protect this country. However, I think that in your zeal to achieve those goals you are helping to create that very National ID system. Freedom is a very difficult thing to protect. I suppose the definition of freedom can be twisted to accept anything in its name. Many believe that freedom means being safe. Many now believe that creating a national matrix to document our every movement is freedom. A very wise friend of mine just related a bit of a parable to me that I think puts the situation well into perspective. She asked me this question: Do you know why Zebras have stripes? My answer was - for camouflage. She said, do you see black and white in the landscape of Africa? The stripes don't blend in. The fact is, when a lion (the predator) seeks to capture a Zebra (the prey) he focuses on one animal from the herd, chasing it down until it drops from exhaustion. When a herd of Zebras runs to get away from the lion, the stripes make it absolutely impossible to focus on just one animal. Therefore the lions can't detach just one from the herd. The stripes are the Zebra's protection. It would be to the great advantage of the lion to have a system to focus on one Zebra - a chip, an ID card, some way to break it from the herd. On the other hand, it would be a great disadvantage to the Zebra to have such a system of identification. The question of whether a National ID is good or bad is really a question of who is the predator and who is the prey. In the case of illegal immigration clearly those of us who want to rid the nation of illegals are the predators. So it is easy to support such means to rid us of this threat. Some of us may even take pride in being able to "show our papers" to prove "we are American citizens." It's pretty compelling - until the same system is used to make us the prey. That is my fear, and that is why I oppose any excuse to create even a small piece of a National ID databank system. Like you, I certainly have political enemies. Someday I will certainly be the prey. Once begun, even for an honorable purpose, how can the system be controlled? Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff has said, "Again, eventually, this might allow us to do double-duty or triple duty, have the same license also be used to cross the border, and be used for a whole host of other purposes where you now have to carry different identification." Could it be that those other purposes won't match what you are hoping to accomplish? Could it be that once such a system is in place it will be out of our control? Congressional testimony by Professor Ben Shneiderman of the University of Maryland explains in great detail the problems inherent in trying to integrate existing data banks as a means to guarantee identification. "While most proposals have been well intentioned, some have been misguided in that they overlook the potential for unintended consequences or underestimate the technical challenges and risks inherent in their implementation." Professor Shneiderman, an expert in human-computer interaction, went on to say: "A national ID system requires a complex integration of social and technical systems, including humans to enter and verify data, plus hardware, software and networks to store and transmit. Such socio-technical systems are always vulnerable to error, breakdown, sabotage and destruction by natural events or by people with malicious intentions. For this reason, the creation of a single system of identification could unintentionally result in degrading the overall safety and security of the nation, because of the unrealistic trust in the efficacy of the technology... We must ask whether there is now a secure database that consists of 300 million individual records that can be accessed in real time? The government agencies which come close are the Internal Revenue Service and the Social Security Administration, neither of which are capable of maintaining a network that is widely accessible and responsive to voluminous queries on a 24 hour by 7 days a week basis." No matter how much we may desire a quick, easy solution to deal with the issue of illegal immigration; no matter how well intentioned we may be to enforce tough laws to make it happen, sometimes such actions are worse than the problem they seek to solve. So it is with using federal data banks to establish "verifiable" Identification. Moreover, the E-Verify System is not designed, nor ready for the massive accessibility required to meet the requirements of Section 201. The SS data bank is dirty. And it was not created for the purpose of authenticating citizenship. But you argue that the E-Verify System is already in existence and therefore not helping to create a National ID Card. Consider this congressional testimony by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC): "Under the newly announced changes, the Department of Homeland Security will (1) greatly expand E-Verify, (2) raise fines against employers by 25 percent, (3) increasingly use criminal action against employers, as opposed to administrative action, (4) add to the numbers of databases E-Verify checks by including visa and passport databases, (5) ask states to "voluntarily" allow DHS access to their motor vehicle databases, and (6) use an "enhanced photograph capability" that will allow employers to check photographs in E-Verify databases. These do not resolve the many problems already in E-Verify; instead, the Department of Homeland Security has made the employment eligibility verification worse." The fact is the Real ID Act is not going to just help create a NATIONAL ID, instead it is helping to create an INTERNATIONAL Biometric ID Card. The world is being enrolled into a single global biometric ID system through documents purported to establish and authenticate identity - passports, driver's license Social Security card and others. On March 1, 2007 REAL ID's "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" was issued, revealing REAL ID's global biometric connection. The three main entities driving this system are: The Department of Homeland Security, The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, (AAMVA) and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). AAMVA is an international association of motor vehicle and law enforcement officials and is responsible for international biometric driver's license ID card standards and an international information sharing agreement. ICAO monitors travelers, designed biometric "e-passports" required for "Visa Waiver Nations" and is affiliated with the United Nations. Together, DHS, AAMVA and ICAO are fulfilling the three elements necessary for a global biometric system. The fact is, whether it is your intention or not, by including Sections 201 and 203 into the SAVE Act, you are aiding this international ID effort. This wont increase security, but rather prepare us for a tyranny unknown in human history. I believe that you are honestly trying to create a method by which Identification can be verified. However, it appears you have accepted the premise that the Driver's License is the proper means of identification. In fact it is not. The driver's license is strictly an authorization to drive on American streets and should stay that way. To enforce an ID through DMVs means empowering a hoard of state government employees who were never supposed to have such power, allowing them access to information they aren't supposed to have and in so doing, creating a false sense of security that simply isn't valid. In order to protect the privacy of the American people it is essential that we decouple identification from driver's licenses. The only proper government entity specifically designed to have such information and responsibility is the U.S. Department of State. It alone should have the responsibility to create documents that establish and authenticate identity and that monitor and permit border crossings. And that is really what we are talking about here - border crossings, legal or illegal. In fact, the State Department is now developing a new passport "card" that possibly could be used to satisfy citizen status that you seek under SAVE. It is less than a full passport and it comes in a wallet size that could be easily carried just as the driver's license. While it is true that the Card contains an RFID chip (not to our liking) the chip contains no personal information - only a unique number linking the card to stored records contained in secured government databases. The passport Card currently is not valid for flying, but that could be fixed. I don't specifically advocate use of such a card for many of the same reasons argued here. But, if we are determined to go down the road of government documentation of American citizens, then something on the lines of the passport Card is preferable to creating a vast new system through state DMVs, as long as its purpose is very narrow and strictly enforced so as not to be expanded for secondary uses. ...We are being given a false choice in the immigration war. We are being told that we must sacrifice freedom so that we may have order and security. It's simply not a true choice. As Katherine Albrecht, author of the book "Spychips" wrote, "One of the most surveilled people in history were the Soviets under communist rule. During Stalin's decades-long reign of terror and the KGB era that followed, government agents could intercept and read mail, listen in on phone calls, and plant informants to probe their neighbors' political views and assess their loyalty to the state. The surveillance was near complete, but did the watchful eye of the state keep the Soviet people safe? Hardly. It seems no coincidence that history's most watchful regime was also one of its most deadly. Between 1917 and 1987, the Soviet government killed over 60 million of its own citizens - more than any other government in the 20th Century." Freedom is a difficult concept to retain. We live in dangerous times indeed and we must be very careful in our actions as we seek to achieve certain goals. Just because the technology exists, does not mean that it is the solution to our problem. Nor does its existence require us to use it, especially if such use will make this or other problems worse. This is the case with integrating unrelated, and poorly verified data bases which always has unintended consequences. I believe Sections 201 and 203 of the SAVE Act are helping to create parts of a matrix that will lead to a National ID system which will destroy our liberty. Those are the very liberties you see as threatened by illegal immigration. Illegal immigration can be stopped - but if allowed to start, a National ID will be forever. In such a system today's predators will be tomorrow's prey. For these reasons, the American Policy Center and others are now prepared to resume our fight to oppose the SAVE Act.
The EU is moving toward a national ID system as well. Yes, there could be problems. Anytime the government tries to run something there are problems, but how could it be any worse than the social security system? They send me a statement every year in the mail (accessible to anyone who can open a mailbox) with their return address on it that has listed every cent I've ever made, what I'll get when I retire and other personal information. I think it even has my ss number but I'd have to find one of my statements to be sure. Same thing with credit cards, etc.
ReplyDeleteI believe the National ID is already in the works and, as pointed out, most of the needed data bases already exist and in the case of MCCain, Hillary & Obama some of the relevant files have already been breached.
ReplyDeleteI understand the concern about democracy's descent into facism and we should be on guard against that but nevertheless we often have to choose between inaction and doing something about a major problem. We should proceed with SAVE and ask Mr.Chertoff how he proposes to protect us from the descent into fascism and big brotherism.
I think passports and visas issued for foreigner should be fair game otherwise they are not worth the paper they are printed on. I don't know any reason why citizen passports should be monitored but certainly there are citizens who are up to no good. Wouldn't we like to know if an Iranian or Iraqi or other Muslim citizen makes frequent trips to other countries like Afghanistan or even Mexico? The answer is we better monitor those trips or we are doomed to another 9/11. When that happens how will you view the SAVE bill then? If our country descends not into fascism but devolves into Mexico Norte, then what will your view of SAVE be in retrospect.
The American Policy Center just lost my support and I will tell them so the next time they ask for a donation.
As I pointed out earlier, the SAVE bill is a very modest bill since it requires employers to E-Verify only their new hires rather than all of the illegals already in their employ. I should think the anti-legals would support this bill because it leaves the 12-20 million illegals untouched for E-verification purposes. But then we knew all along they were serious about border security or they would not continually insist on denying us the tools to achieve effective border control especially as that effectiveness is supported by vigorous internal enforcement and E-verification. It can't be done any other way. Physical barrier improvements and staffing increases are not enough. Without internal enforcement our borders will continue to be porous and employers will continue to be magnets for border violators.
It has been suggested at a part of a three part program that we penalize or sanction employers of illegals but no one has suggested how this might be done without massive daily roundups and or E-verification so get serious.
Ultima, that is why we know those ethnocentrics like dee don't really want border security and they don't want internal enforcement which would hold the employers accountable for hiring illegals, they constantly deny us the tools to do so. They aren't concerned about Mexico Norte, in fact they are looking forward to it.
ReplyDeletecome on dee, you wanted to go after the employers and the SAVE act will help us do that.
ReplyDeleteanon, the thing is that dee only wants the employers punished but not the illegals. How biased is that? Shouldn't all parties to a crime be punished?
ReplyDeleteDianne,
ReplyDeleteYou are right. My husband and I both get that statement each year from SS.
Anon,
ReplyDeleteDid you read my post on the Save Act?
http://immigrationmexicanamerican.blogspot.com/2008/03/antis-in-congress-to-force-introduction.html
Dee, your Gestapo hyperbole is showing again. That tends to weaken any argument you might otherwise make against this modest border security bill.
ReplyDeleteAlthough a little off topic, here's is a real example of how the government runs roughshod over its citizens to dip into their wallets:
ReplyDeleteA Powerful Economic Stimulus Tool
Now that we are faced with a recession, a National Taxpayers Union legal brief, originally issued in 1992 while another Bush was in office, has been reissued. It states that President Bush can act now to create an additional stimulus for our lagging economy without Congressional approval by indexing capital gains for inflation.
For roughly two decades, significant portions of the U.S. Tax Code have tied to inflation rates. For example, the personal exemption, standard deduction, and tax bracket amounts for individual income tax returns rise each year to account for increases in the cost of living. Doing so avoids the “bracket creep” phenomenon that pushed Americans into paying progressively higher income tax rates even though their incomes were merely keeping up with inflation. Formerly, this amounted to an automatic tax increase without an on the record vote by the Congress.
The most important source of income that remains to be indexed is capital gains. The “real cost” of assets like the stocks and bonds must be inflation-adjusted in calculating the sale profit to ensure that gains solely due to inflation are not taxed. Though the Treasury Department and Congress traditionally have defined “cost” as the asset’s original cost and a “gain” as the difference between the original price and the selling price these definitions are not established law. The Treasury therefore has administrative discretion to reinterpret “cost” to take account of the economic reality that a nominal “gain” attributable solely to inflation adds nothing to the taxpayer’s real wealth or purchasing power. It’s time for the Administration to step forward and correct this major irrationality in the tax code. The legal authority of the Department of the Treasury to promulgate a regulation providing for the indexation of capital gains, is available at
www.ntu.org. Let’s put the heat on the President, the Secretary of the Treasury, and/or the Congress to correct this stupid indexation omission. This is the right time!
Inflation-indexing keeps taxpayers from being penalized or taxed on phantom gains that don’t result in real increases of purchasing or earning power. Here is a simplified, hypothetical example:
Sale of a $10,000 Asset Held for 10 Years
Current Policy
Original Price $6,000
Amount of Gain $4,000
Tax on Gain (15%): $600
Inflation-Indexing
Original Price $6,000
Amount of Gain $4,000
Cum. Inflation Rate over 10 years: 50%
Inflation-adjusted Gain $2,000
Tax on Real Gain (15%): $300
well,
ReplyDeletemark me down as a person who wants to minimize government intrusion in our lives.
I am scared of the government having all this data.
however i see no method other than the save act that will be effective in preventing the undocumented from getting employment
so i support it
dee, MIA again. I guess she gets tired of getting so beat up in her own blog. She posts an article or a remark and then disappears except for an occasional appearence because she can't handle the truth.
ReplyDeleteWhy do you even keep this blog going, dee? Where are all your amigos to support your point of view in here? We anti's debate with civility. Perhaps they don't want to debate in here because they can't debate with civility or they lack viable arguments?
dee's blog R.I.P., lol.
Pat,
ReplyDeleteQuit Your Wishful Thinking!
I posted yesterday and today, even though I am on vacation this long weekend(but back tonight).
I told you, I am going to continue my blog. I cannot stop until you´ve learned all of your lessons Pat!!
Ulty,
ReplyDeleteNothing the Bush´s do surprised me. I still think they are looking for some way to put Jeb in as the VP so they can keep their power. Mark my prediction on this.
Why else are they having Rove and Gingrich are out there helping McCain as they are. All the old dinosaurs are on the bandwagon!
The only lessons to be learned from you dee, is how to an anarchist in one's own country. No thanks, I love my country.
ReplyDeleteThe only lessons to be learned from you dee, is how to an anarchist in one's own country. No thanks, I love my country.
ReplyDeletePat,
ReplyDeleteYou are more like an Anti-Christ Pat. LOL
"Nothing the Bush´s do surprised me."
ReplyDeleteActually, in this case, it is their inaction that is open to criticism. Did you understand the example? If you are an owner of stocks and bonds, you should be writing to your congressmen, the President, and the Secretary of the Treasury.
There are a lot of ordinary people invested in the stock market one way or another and they deserve to be treated fairly by having any capital gains indexed to inflation.
It is incredible to me that this irrationality remains in the tax code but then again the whole code is far too complex and lengthy. This is just one aspect of that code that could easily be fixed.
And it is not just stocks and bonds. Although there is a special tax break on the gain from the sale of one's home, without that the situation would be the same as it is with stocks, bonds, and mutual funds. For example, without that special provision, if you bought a house for $200,000 and then 20 years later you sold it for $400,000, you would be on the hook for a tax on the gain of $200,000. However, if the cumulative inflation during that 20 years amounted to 100%, your nominal gain would not be a real gain; it would be a phantom gain due solely to inflation. To show the proof of this, again ignoring any special provisions in the tax code related to one's home, if you went ahead and paid the tax which might be 15% and then later decided to buy a different but similar house, you would have to pony up the 39% you paid in taxes that you no longer have.
The same is true if you buy a stock for $50,000, hold it for 20 years, sell it for $100,000 with cumulative inflation of 100%, you have no real gain because the $100,000 will only buy the same amount of goods and services you could have purchased with the original $50,000 at the outset. The only problem is you don't really have the $100,000 because you had to give $15,000 of this phantom gain to Uncle Sam.
To: American Policy Center
ReplyDeleteYour unfortunate opposition to the modest SAVE bill has done grave damage to the case for border security and internal enforcement to secure our country against illegal aliens. The Pro-Illegals are trumpeting your opposition and using your words to undermine our efforts to curb border violations and reduce legal immigration. They, based on your comments, are now calling the bill the Gestapo bill.
Your opposition to this bill has made it impossible for us to continue to support your organization. We understand your point of view regarding SAVE but disagree with it. While we must remain vigilant to make sure our country does not slide downward into fascism and big brotherism, we must also take the long view regarding immigration and illegal aliens and what they will mean to our country as it slides in a different downward direction into Mexico Norte.
Population driven economic growth is unsustainable in the long run. The limit of natural resources like petroleum, water, arable land and other minerals per capita as population grows without bounds is zero. Therefore the question becomes, how far down that road do we want to go?
The volume of traffic at the border under NAFTA is so large there is little chance the the border patrol will be able to apprehend a determined and well financed terrorist from bringing a WMD into our country. At that point you will surely have to re-evaluate your stand on measures like SAVE even if you have to think of it in terms of the lesser of two evils. Your opposition is a big mistake and brings into question your commitment to national security and border security to say nothing about the other causes you champion.
Ultima...I just took a look at your blogs. I found out you are a CPA and an Engineer...impressive...no wonder you have so many facts and figures.
ReplyDeleteDianne,
ReplyDeleteWhile Ultima and I disagree on the Immigration issues, there are some issues we agree upon. We believe in God, we love our families, we love old movies.
I am proud to have Ultima and Liquid and you and others as participants on my blog. Ultima and Liquid especially are both very intelligent and bring a wealth of knowledge. I learn from them and, if nothing else, they cause me to study websites, references and build my argument. As you know we were participants in another Immigration forum and learned to appreciate one another although we disagree on this issue.
I added Ultima´s website to my blogroll. I would like all my readers to read and understand other viewpoints in order to form their opinions.
dee, too bad you don't use Ultima and Liquid's intelligence and wealth of knowledge to alter your opinion as to what is right for America rather than what you deem is right for illegal foreigners. It does no good to have a brilliant teacher if the student is either too dense or too biased to absorb and take to heart what they are learning.
ReplyDeleteDianne, the reason the other forum was closed is because of deceit and hatefulness on the part of a particular member in there which shall remain nameless, lol. Use your imagination though. There was zero respect for that person.
I'm not taking sides on a personal basis. It's hard enough dealing with the issues.
ReplyDeleteI grew up in a blue collar Democratic household so I've got a lot of empathy for that class of people. I know how hard they work and the struggles they face. As an adult I worked for a large drug company for years and was the Director of Regulatory Affairs for one of their Animal Health Divisions. My job was to make certain our company followed the rules while getting drug products approved as quickly as possible. I was very strict about the rules because one big mistake could have ruined the company. So, the rule of law is also in my blood.
When I look at the issue of illegal immigration, I look at it through my background and that's probably how we all look at it. I see the illegal immigrants taking good paying jobs Americans do want and need, construction in particular, and I see businesses not only ignoring the law, but laughing at it and it makes my blood boil. I also know that there are millions of illegal immigrants who only want the same thing, good jobs and businesses that treat them fairly, but I don't believe they or their supporters realize the toll that takes on American citizens, in particular the low and middle class, in terms of jobs and the the cost (taxes) to educate their kids, to provide them with medical care, etc.
This is where I come from on the immigration issue.
The above anon was me, Dianne. I must have hit the wrong button.
ReplyDeletedee,
ReplyDeleteI believe in God, love my family and also love old movies. We have this in common along with Liquid and Ultima. I am against illegal immigration and have that in common with Liquid and Ultima. So in reality, I have more in common with Liquid and Ultima than you do. Both Ultima and Liquid come across as being very intelligent, yet you seem to disregard every thing they say. So when you say you have learned from them, exactly what have you learned? Please share with us.
Dianne,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your telling us more about your background. I lived in the KC area for a few years. I worked in the city and lived in the burbs. They were two totally different worlds, as I am sure you will agree.
You are right in saying people draw their perspectives from their own life experiences.
My father, my parents taught me the value of Church, Family, hard work, discipline and resilience. They also sheltered me from bad influences as I sheltered my children. Thats why I (and my children, nor g babies) have ever done drugs and have always lived by my family principles.
I also have to say that the fact that there are two different worlds in KC and the burbs is wrong! All citizens...
There are obvious reasons for what is wrong and you know what they are Dianne.
There also is good and bad in the city and in the burbs.
Anon,
ReplyDeleteI am not sure which Anon you are so I cannot tell your history of posting. Some ANTI Anons are more blatant than others, so I have no basis of reference for you for now.
I don´t know that you have more in common with Ulty or Liquid than I do. You may share a common perspective on the Immigration issue where my viewpoint differs. However, Ulty and Liquid are civil and we all have a certain degree of respect for one another. Respect is key throughout our Civil discussions.
My parents and I have worked as migrant laborers. We also experienced laws that were unjust and many of these laws were changed. So in forming my root opinion, I think back to my own experiences and my own interactions with people and my own experiences with the changes of certain laws.
You asked what I have learned from Liquid and Ulty (and Lupita)? When I first came to this discussion, I thought the issues were black and white, right or wrong, good side or bad side. I also thought there were only two sides. They and others taught me there are several sides to this issue and several shades of gray. They taught me I needed to study each perspective and not just shoot down the ANTI side. They taught me that in some ways they are right. Example: Guest Workers, H2B Visas, Employer Exploiters.
They have also learned from me. I showed them my resilience, particularly when I started my blog. I showed them other sides to this issue. We all learned to discuss civilly, without getting angry. In some respects, we like each other. They know I am not going away. They learned there are civil and logical sides to this discussion. They know about poor treatment in Detention Centers and Racial Profiling and agree this should not be happening.
"My father, my parents taught me the value of Church, Family, hard work, discipline and resilience."
ReplyDeleteWhy is that you never mention that your parents taught you to love this country? Did they not love this country?
Anon,
ReplyDeleteI love our Great USA! My father and mom taught us all well! If you read my book you would knw this!
If you read my blog often, you would know this!
Read the top of my page. "Truth, Honesty and the American Way!"
You should see it every second you are on my pages!
God Bless America!
Anon,
ReplyDeleteTell us your story. Tell us why we should believe you are a patriotic American. Tell us about your family and childhood since you ask about mine.
xxx ooo
BTW,
ReplyDeleteMy husband and I have been watching the "John Adams" miniseries on HBO.
I love it!
I also love the fact that this miniseries is bringing the founding fathers to life, beyond icons on a pedestal in a history book, but to real life as real human beings.
What is amazing to me is so few people were involved in setting the standards. Many were opposed to Adams and his allies in seeking Freedom.
I´ve been studying Adams ancestery. His ancestors were Welsh, many descendants from Southern Europe, including the Latin countries.
He was in opposition to the existing Rule of Law set by Great Brittain. He wrote anonymous letters disputing the laws demanding change and Freedom. He based his "thoughts on government" on Greek Law (Aristotle) and NOT on the English Parliament.
All very interesting to know that the Founding Fathers were more in line with my ancestry and form of government. Hmmm. Very interesting.
If one truly loves their country, they will support our laws and not an illegal ivasion of their own country. Our immigration laws are not unjust and therefore don't need reforming or changing. Only those with a sinister agenda would think so.
ReplyDeleteI believe we as a nation need Comprehensive Immigration Reform. Our existing Immigration laws are Broken! CIR will resolve these issues.
ReplyDeleteWhat proof do you have that our Immigration system is broken?
ReplyDeleteYour own National Hispanic Caucus is keeping out more than 60,000 H-2B workers, our own farmers would rather cheat the system and hire Illegal Aliens vs, using the H-2A visa that they are sub-sidised for. It seems to me that its being used by the 2 above as leverage to force immigration on their terms and not the terms of the protection of the American Citizen.
Amen, Liquid. Our immigration laws are not broken, they just weren't enforced and the farmers cheated by not using the visas they had access to. Now we have a population driven economy with all these illegal foreigners in our country and it is negatively impacting our schools, healthcare facilities and driving up our taxes. But when you have an ethnocentric agenda one doesn't care about that even though they are being negatively impacted too.
ReplyDeletedee,
ReplyDeleteWhy do you come across as so un-American? Your mother did not or would not speak English, so in what ways did she teach you to love this country? What were the things that your father loved most about the USA?
Anon,
ReplyDeleteYou are funny. You say you are AFRAID of the government having your information, yet you continue to bash me for more information about my life.
I have written a book. It is a link on my website. It tells my whole story. I speak proudly of my USA and my quest to improve our broken immigration policies.
I have nothing to hide, yet you tell us absolutely NOTHING about you. I asked and you REFUSE to answer. What are you hiding. Why don´t you want our govt to know about you. What are you hiding? All very, very curious. It is YOU that comes across unAmerican and Secretive. Shame on you.
Liquid,
ReplyDeleteYou and I know our Immigration policies are terribly broken. In order for a person to come into this country legally, with no sponsor, it may take 10 - 20 years, the backlog is that Huge. I´ve posted links to validate this and I also shared my brotherinlaw´s story.
Both Barack and Hillary and John McCain have talked about this. You should know!
Ulty,
ReplyDeleteHave you heard from the American Policy Center? Have they responded to your letter? Just curious.
They agree with me that we should say NO to this bill.
Beyond their reasons and the loss of our Civil Liberties, this bill promotes increased enforcement, additional sweeps, additional detention centers and the hiring of contractors like Blackwater who have already build additional sites and unmanned aircraft in persuit of this contract if this bill is passed. We will all be living in fear and terror if this occurs!
dee, you are beyond ridiculous! Why would any "citizen" have to live in fear if the SAVE ACT is passed? Dee...the eternal drama queen and spewer of exaggerations and false claims. What is your favorite saying? Shame on you!
ReplyDeleteYou believe the system is broken, I do not. I believe the system is fine, I am not a GLOBALIST. I don't care if its 50 years or if they ever get in. I do know they talked about it, that is also why I am not voting for any of them and their GLOBALIST agendas.
ReplyDeleteHere is a question, Dee. Do you believe in the right for a woman to have an Abortion? yes or no will do just fine.
Pat, You forgot to post your name as Anonymous again.
ReplyDeleteLOL
LOL
LOL
Liquid,
ReplyDeleteI personally do not believe in Abortion and have never had one, nor do I promote anyone having them.
I also do not believe in Gun Ownership. I don´t own one. I would never carry one.
I also do not believe in Drug or Alcohol Abuse. I don´t do drugs and I only occassionally have a glass of wine and I would never abuse them. (so there Pat-Anon)
I also believe in going to church on Sunday, raising my children and g-babies with rules and responsibility.
dee, FYI I never post under anonymous. I always post under "patriot". Whats your little game tonight?
ReplyDeleteYou think because you post under anonymous sometimes that others do? You give yourself away with your anti in caps, yikes, Mayberry and one or two other identifiable traits. Not my style. I have no reason to post under anonymous.
ReplyDeleteDee says:
ReplyDeleteI personally do not believe in Abortion and have never had one, nor do I promote anyone having them.
I also do not believe in Gun Ownership. I don´t own one. I would never carry one.
Are those not then Republican stances that you take?
And yet, you are a Democrat? With the answer you gave, could one assume you are a globalist then. If so, then are you for lowering American wages to match that of third world countries or are you for raising the income of those in the third world countries to equate to ours?
I, on the other hand, believe in both, and own numerous guns. I am a Democrat, and believe in the Blue Dogs 100%, having come from, like Diane, a blue collar working class family. Dianes post of March 24, 2008 8:23 AM, pretty much sums up myself as well.
Liquid,
ReplyDeleteI said those are my personal beliefs. My stance on abortion is viewed as Republican. My stance on gun ownership is viewed as Democratic.
However, I dont demand everyone follow my views nor do I impose my views on others. I don´t deny other women the freedom of choice nor do I rip the gun out of the Republican hands. I believe in the Bill of Rights, Freedom of Religion, Choice, etc. In fact, the reason I started this blog is to share my view and promote open dialogue by both sides.
I may not agree with what you say but I do defend your right to say it.
It is useful to try everything in practice anyway and I like that here it's always possible to find something new. :)
ReplyDelete