Quote from: zewazir on March 29, 2015, 04:07:09 PM
As in they changed the laws. The law regarding who gets a green card are still there, but the laws regarding what we do to those who don't get a green card HAVE changed. Therefore, the system IS broken. As such, the system needs to be fixed.
Of course it's a problem, and this aspect simply reinforces my stance that the system of laws IS broken. Here we are talking about the definition of citizen, which is written into the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, (And another example of unintended consequences....) and its effect on immigration. Gonna be very hard to constitutionally enforce laws which exclude anchor babies.
I suggest you read the actual code involved. There have been a significant number of modifications to the laws of the 40s, 50s, and 60s you refer to as "unbroken". Previous admins BROKE the law by changing it. Again: the system of laws IS BROKEN.  Simply "enforcing" will not work unless we also fix what is causing so many to break the law.
Again, you bring up a point which simply supports my claim that the system of laws is not working.
Agreed. But we will be in the position of doing so to millions of people annually until the other parts of the law are fixed. We must, to continue with your analogy, reduce the number of carrots in the system of laws. We also need to increase the number of sticks in the system of laws, to include items like fines and other penalties harsh enough to make employers think twice about skirting the laws against employing illegal immigrants. But, again, that involves changing (ie: FIXING) problems with the system of laws.
Again, agreed. But the current law does not provide for any significant penalties. Therefore, the law needs to be changed. (FIXED.)
Huh? So telling states they cannot use federal welfare to benefit illegal immigrants is "punishing the parents"?  How is that a "punishment" at all (except to the illegals who are currently living off our tax dollars?) You DON'T think we should remove welfare from illegals?

The rest of that P was simply acknowledging that not much can be done from the federal level when it comes to states like Commiefornia welcoming illegals by the droves and rewarding their criminal activity with welfare and drivers licenses. (and voter registration?) In short, some fixes will need to take place at the state level, which makes fixing the system that much more difficult because we'll be fighting the uber liberal states.

I knew something was screwy. We're actually both on the same page essentially.

I thought you were falling into the Establishments narrative  "We Need Immigration Reform", granted, we can all agree it's broken on every level, but what Conservatives see as a fix, and what the Marxists and rino Establishment mean as reform are at completely opposite ends of the spectrum.

Honestly, we just need to close the border, kick out all the crony capitalists, reverse all laws on immigration going back 70 years and start from there.

This includes Cruz?

Quote from: Solar on March 29, 2015, 04:51:07 PM
I knew something was screwy. We're actually both on the same page essentially.

I thought you were falling into the Establishments narrative  "We Need Immigration Reform", granted, we can all agree it's broken on every level, but what Conservatives see as a fix, and what the Marxists and rino Establishment mean as reform are at completely opposite ends of the spectrum.

Honestly, we just need to close the border, kick out all the crony capitalists, reverse all laws on immigration going back 70 years and start from there.

Well, IMO the issue is too complex to simply go back to the laws from 1945. If nothing else, technology in agriculture has significantly changed that picture, and many 1945 laws flat out won't fit.

And it also concerns me that many conservatives think shipping 11 million illegals back home will accomplish anything for very long when the economic environment continues to invite them right back in, even with strict border control. As I said in a previous post, no border can be closed completely when people are properly motivated to cross it. Look at what East Germany did to keep their people in, and still had several thousand crossings a year from a much smaller population using a much smaller border. Add to that the fact that we could never get away with the outright inhumane methods used by East Germany, and I think you can see what I mean.

It is that aspect of the issue I am trying to address.  Until we change the laws so they quit encouraging people on both sides of the border to break immigration law, and replace them with laws that encourage using the legal immigration system, then deporting illegals will end up being an extremely expensive, and rather ineffective measure.

Quote from: zewazir on March 29, 2015, 07:41:04 PM
Well, IMO the issue is too complex to simply go back to the laws from 1945. If nothing else, technology in agriculture has significantly changed that picture, and many 1945 laws flat out won't fit.

And it also concerns me that many conservatives think shipping 11 million illegals back home will accomplish anything for very long when the economic environment continues to invite them right back in, even with strict border control. As I said in a previous post, no border can be closed completely when people are properly motivated to cross it. Look at what East Germany did to keep their people in, and still had several thousand crossings a year from a much smaller population using a much smaller border. Add to that the fact that we could never get away with the outright inhumane methods used by East Germany, and I think you can see what I mean.

It is that aspect of the issue I am trying to address.  Until we change the laws so they quit encouraging people on both sides of the border to break immigration law, and replace them with laws that encourage using the legal immigration system, then deporting illegals will end up being an extremely expensive, and rather ineffective measure.

That last sentence bugs me.  Expensive?  Ineffective?  You're listening to the liberal arguments and near on the verge of drinking that dammed kool-aid.  Why do you think Obola pushed these people in here to start with, busing hundreds into every neighborhood in America?  Just in case he couldn't find enough to drag our economy even further down, he invites people from other countries other than Mex. to come here.  Then we get these arguments that it would be too expensive to send them back home even though we paid their passage here all the while taking care of placing them in situations that they could live and flourish in.  The plan worked exactly the way it was designed to work.  They are here and they ain't going anywhere and we're going to make sure that they have a nice ride by providing for them via tax dollars.  We've been duped to start with but it could be fixed.  All we have to do is enforce the laws already in the books.  Take all the money to do this out of the democratic coffers, present and future, until the debt is paid. 

Quote from: keyboarder on March 29, 2015, 09:21:55 PM
That last sentence bugs me.  Expensive?  Ineffective?  You're listening to the liberal arguments and near on the verge of drinking that dammed kool-aid.  Why do you think Obola pushed these people in here to start with, busing hundreds into every neighborhood in America?  Just in case he couldn't find enough to drag our economy even further down, he invites people from other countries other than Mex. to come here.  Then we get these arguments that it would be too expensive to send them back home even though we paid their passage here all the while taking care of placing them in situations that they could live and flourish in.  The plan worked exactly the way it was designed to work.  They are here and they ain't going anywhere and we're going to make sure that they have a nice ride by providing for them via tax dollars.  We've been duped to start with but it could be fixed.  All we have to do is enforce the laws already in the books.  Take all the money to do this out of the democratic coffers, present and future, until the debt is paid.

What the F is it with some of the people here that whenever someone expresses an opinion which they disagree, out come the "your just a koolaid drinking liberal" accusations?  Grow the F up people. I assumed the purpose of this is to have dialog, not just expound a bunch of conservative talking points as if we had no more brains than the liberals.

Yes, simply deporting illegal immigrants will be expensive AND ineffective. And that is not koolaid. Taking the cheapest route available you can think of, and try calculating just how much it will cost to send 11 million (using their figures) people across the southern border. (Now calculate it again for 25-30 million, which is probably closer to how many illegals there are to worry about.)

Taking the cheapest route, calculate how much it will cost to continue to deport 1-2 million people each year because we still haven't addressed those factors that make it attractive to break our immigration laws. Yes, that is about how many will infiltrate our borders annually, walls not withstanding, unless we do something completely drastic (and unacceptable even to most conservatives) such a mine both sides of the walls.

Is it "prohibitively expensive" to deport illegal immigrants? (THAT is what the liberals are saying, which is just a mite different than simply saying "expensive")  No it is not prohibitively expensive, especially when compared to the long term costs of allowing them to stay.  That is not what I am saying, nor am I saying we should not deport those already here.  But it IS both expensive - more so than it should be - and inefficient since we will end up continuing to need to do so UNTIL WE CHANGE THE LAWS so that breaking the law is not so attractive.

We change those laws which make it attractive to sneak across our borders, add new laws that make it more attractive to wait in line and go through the proper paperwork and procedures to enter this country legally, design a system such that people are not facing a 10 year wait for their turn to come in legally, AND deport those who still won't follow the law. Changing the laws to encourage following the law instead of breaking it, we will be faced with far fewer deportations, which will, of course, be less expensive.

Quote from: zewazir on March 29, 2015, 07:41:04 PM
Well, IMO the issue is too complex to simply go back to the laws from 1945. If nothing else, technology in agriculture has significantly changed that picture, and many 1945 laws flat out won't fit.

And that's the line I always get from libs when I try and explain TEA and the beauty of our Founding ideals. in returning to a simpler set of laws as they had given us, in simply shrinking the Fed.
There is nothing complicated about simplicity, and reversing 70 years of bureaucracy is a pretty damned good place to start.

QuoteAnd it also concerns me that many conservatives think shipping 11 million illegals back home will accomplish anything for very long when the economic environment continues to invite them right back in, even with strict border control.

Where in the Hell did that come from, who said anything about deporting anyone?
I was referring to just the last year alone, where the Dim party promised indigents from S/A, "citizenship if they just cross the borders, send your babies, you can follow later".
Show me an actual law on the books that say's the Marxist party can do that!
And you think the immigration system is broken? The system is not broken, it's been made irrelevant.

QuoteAs I said in a previous post, no border can be closed completely when people are properly motivated to cross it. Look at what East Germany did to keep their people in, and still had several thousand crossings a year from a much smaller population using a much smaller border. Add to that the fact that we could never get away with the outright inhumane methods used by East Germany, and I think you can see what I mean.

Wherein lies the issue I pointed out earlier, that our so called Reps are to blame for the failure.
Hell, McCain stood on the border in 2012 and stated unequivocally, that the border needed to be sealed.
Yeah, he actually had the audacity to look into the camera and blatantly lie to the American people.
Then after Conservatives refused to believe anymore of his worthless traitorous ass, he pushes for an amnesty Bill.
Yet you seem to blame all of their actions on what you presume to be failed laws?

QuoteIt is that aspect of the issue I am trying to address.  Until we change the laws so they quit encouraging people on both sides of the border to break immigration law, and replace them with laws that encourage using the legal immigration system, then deporting illegals will end up being an extremely expensive, and rather ineffective measure.

Damn man! How many ways do you need it presented? It's Not the Law, it's those we've charged with enforcing the laws, that didn't only fail us, they are getting their pockets lined to break them.

Simply enforcing the law on the books is all that's being asked, no, demanded of our Representatives.
Give me what you consider to be an example of changes in the law that would make any difference whatsoever.
Then ask yourself, would they be enforced any differently than the ones already in existence?

Let me reiterate. Changing the law will do nothing, it's the lack of enforcement that is at the heart of the matter.
Or rather, the willingness of Reps to break the law for personal gain

Quote from: zewazir on March 29, 2015, 09:44:26 PM
Taking the cheapest route, calculate how much it will cost to continue to deport 1-2 million people each year because we still haven't addressed those factors that make it attractive to break our immigration laws. Yes, that is about how many will infiltrate our borders annually, walls not withstanding, unless we do something completely drastic (and unacceptable even to most conservatives) such a mine both sides of the walls.

Ask yourself what draws people to risk their lives to come from places in SA and Mexico, across a brutal desert in northern Mexico and the southern US to live in this country.  Yes closing the border and deporting them will not stop the flow of illegals, just slow down the inevitable. New laws will not stop the flow either, why should it when existing laws that are unenforced haven't.

When we had a recession a few years ago, the flow of illegals out of the country increased. That should be a clue as to what this country needs to do to reduce the reason that illegals come to this country.

Part of the problem is that our elected officials that swear to uphold the laws of this country don't. We don't need new or tougher laws that politicians won't enforce, we just need to enforce our existing laws. We don't need to provide free anything to illegals and we sure as hell should not be allowing them to work here. Until we,as a nation,grown a pair and make it cost prohibitive for employers to hire illegals, the problem will never be solved. Until we grow a pair and stop giving illegals the same rights and benefits as citizens, the problem will just continue to grow.

Thanks solar and tac for the comments.  We (all three of us) have tried to explain the immigration problem to this poster.  In my case, I'm told that I need to grow up.  I guess it was because I have a simple solution to our growing problem with illegals and that is exactly what both of you stated as well.  We need enforcement of the laws we already have in dealing with immigration.  Simple.  In my 70 years on earth, I've never had a problem with following any law we have and in following our laws to the best of my ability I've missed out on the various correctional means and facilities that we have in the states.  It has been so much better to just obey our laws-no one is hurt that way.  Whenever people break laws to better their situation, the trickle down effect kicks in and somebody on down the line has to pay.  We are being asked to reward lawlessness by taking up measures to make sure that the invaders of our country get their free ride. 

Hell no!  Why should we reward anything remotely close to what our congress is suggesting along the lines of "a pathway to citizenship'?  That path was formed long ago but the folks in that path are restless and want what they want now.  They have never stopped having babies to lighten their load, just keep having babies here and the liberals will raise so much hell that the rest of us won't want to be the bad guys and so give in. 
I'd never give in to the demands of a people that think they are above the laws of our land.  Has our history not taught some people anything? 

We are a nation of immigrants and as such have a diverse bunch of people.  Some are very ambitious and intelligent and make wonderful contributions to our nation.  Others may not be as affluent and cause alot of problems.  Nevertheless, it has taken alot of differences to make up this country.  Everyone pretty much agrees that we do have moral codes and laws governing us but there has to be order in all things.  Where is the order in pushing our nose into actions created by power hungry individuals whose sole reason is their own agenda of creating a legacy of sorts that makes a mockery of the very origin of our nation?  Hell, we may as well go back to the lawlessness of the wild west and everyman for himself deal.

I recognize, and acknowledge, that a major factor in the illegal immigrant problem that current laws are not being enforced. (Solar: what brought up deportation is your desire to enforce existing law, and go back to laws of 70 years ago. One of the laws being most ignored is that part which requires deportation of illegal immigrants. Laws which are not enforced are even more useless than you average politician. So, yes, enforcement of current laws - which do include deportation - need to be enforced, to the letter and consistently.

But there is still more in the picture than unenforced immigration laws. Some laws, many of which are not immigration laws, ARE being enforced, and in being enforced, contribute heavily to the problem.

Let me give some examples of laws that ARE being enforced, but not to our benefit.

How about the laws of several states which gives illegal aliens our tax dollars in dozens of targeted welfare programs. Does anyone think we should, just maybe, CHANGE those laws?

Or how about the laws in several states which give illegals preferential treatment in the education system? Or, for that matter, laws allowing them to be enrolled in public, or even private schools in the first place? I dunno, but seems to me changing those law just MIGHT reduce the reasons so many are willing to risk coming here in violation of the law.  Just MAYBE?

How about those state that allow illegals to be issued valid drivers licenses. Another law I'd like to see changed.

And one I've already mentioned: change federal law to forbid state welfare agencies from using federal dollars to fund welfare for illegals.

And, does anyone know the penalties out there, were the law enforced, for hiring illegals? In some places the fines are so low, an employer can pay them from one day's profit difference between hiring illegals, and paying minimum (or in many places UNION) wages to legal workers.  Maybe change THOSE laws, increasing the penalty for hiring illegals so it is no longer profitable to risk getting caught.

And, yes, we need a government with people who will strictly enforce the laws that make it unattractive to break our immigration laws, and change or get rid of all those laws which make it ATTRACTIVE to break our immigration laws. And no, it will NOT be cheap, but the alternative of letting things continue as is, or be made orders of magnitude worse through amnesty is already even more expensive. But  unless we address ALL the factors which lead to people literally risk death in order to break our immigration laws, just keeping things in balance will continue to be expensive. But it needn't continue to be expensive IF we get rid of the laws that were written to lure them here. AND enforce existing laws. AND make some of those existing laws more strict, with harsher penalties. If risking their lives to come here in violation of law has ZERO chance of netting them the maximum of a ride back south, and in most cases a boot in the backside (or some technological equivalent) before they even cross the border going north, then I don't see many making the attempt.

Oh, and the issue of anchor babies MUST be addressed, even if it means amending the 14th Amendment. We cannot allow anchor babies, yet the Constitution itself says they must. Nor can we, without being hypocrites in the liberal style, be willing to enforce laws in violation of the Constitution, no matter how much we need to do so.

What we need to fix the problem is a mighty tall order.

Especially the need to fill government with honest, conservative politicians. I'm not sure such a thing exists.

Your points regarding education and welfare are valid points, but if they are state laws CONgress can and will do nothing.

The entire illegal snafu boils down to one thing - votes for the politicians. When the two parties are both pandering for the same vote, you can pretty well count on them never changing or enforcing any laws that will restrict that vote. New laws to restrict what the illegals get are a pipe dream and won't happen as long as the politicians want those votes. The problem isn't the laws it's the politicians, they are the things that need to be changed.

In the mean time, enforce the current laws, if you can,and many of these illegals will probably self deport. Until we get Constitutional conservatives running the states and the federal government, don't expect any change from so called conservatives like Bush.

Quote from: zewazir on March 30, 2015, 10:18:57 PM
I recognize, and acknowledge, that a major factor in the illegal immigrant problem that current laws are not being enforced. (Solar: what brought up deportation is your desire to enforce existing law, and go back to laws of 70 years ago. One of the laws being most ignored is that part which requires deportation of illegal immigrants. Laws which are not enforced are even more useless than you average politician. So, yes, enforcement of current laws - which do include deportation - need to be enforced, to the letter and consistently.

But there is still more in the picture than unenforced immigration laws. Some laws, many of which are not immigration laws, ARE being enforced, and in being enforced, contribute heavily to the problem.

Let me give some examples of laws that ARE being enforced, but not to our benefit.

How about the laws of several states which gives illegal aliens our tax dollars in dozens of targeted welfare programs. Does anyone think we should, just maybe, CHANGE those laws?

Or how about the laws in several states which give illegals preferential treatment in the education system? Or, for that matter, laws allowing them to be enrolled in public, or even private schools in the first place? I dunno, but seems to me changing those law just MIGHT reduce the reasons so many are willing to risk coming here in violation of the law.  Just MAYBE?

How about those state that allow illegals to be issued valid drivers licenses. Another law I'd like to see changed.

And one I've already mentioned: change federal law to forbid state welfare agencies from using federal dollars to fund welfare for illegals.

And, does anyone know the penalties out there, were the law enforced, for hiring illegals? In some places the fines are so low, an employer can pay them from one day's profit difference between hiring illegals, and paying minimum (or in many places UNION) wages to legal workers.  Maybe change THOSE laws, increasing the penalty for hiring illegals so it is no longer profitable to risk getting caught.

And, yes, we need a government with people who will strictly enforce the laws that make it unattractive to break our immigration laws, and change or get rid of all those laws which make it ATTRACTIVE to break our immigration laws. And no, it will NOT be cheap, but the alternative of letting things continue as is, or be made orders of magnitude worse through amnesty is already even more expensive. But  unless we address ALL the factors which lead to people literally risk death in order to break our immigration laws, just keeping things in balance will continue to be expensive. But it needn't continue to be expensive IF we get rid of the laws that were written to lure them here. AND enforce existing laws. AND make some of those existing laws more strict, with harsher penalties. If risking their lives to come here in violation of law has ZERO chance of netting them the maximum of a ride back south, and in most cases a boot in the backside (or some technological equivalent) before they even cross the border going north, then I don't see many making the attempt.

Oh, and the issue of anchor babies MUST be addressed, even if it means amending the 14th Amendment. We cannot allow anchor babies, yet the Constitution itself says they must. Nor can we, without being hypocrites in the liberal style, be willing to enforce laws in violation of the Constitution, no matter how much we need to do so.

What we need to fix the problem is a mighty tall order.

Especially the need to fill government with honest, conservative politicians. I'm not sure such a thing exists.

Z, I know what you're saying, even agree. But passing new laws, because the old ones are being ignored or intentionally broken, is not gong to solve anything.

I say roll back 70 years for reasons of simplicity, because along the way, the laws have been relaxed or totally changed governing Fed assistance to states with an illegal problem, encouraging bad behavior, all thanks to the GOP assisting the Dims.
The so called two party system created this problem, and expecting them to fix it is an attempt at insanity.

We must purge the perpetrators in the party, as we are currently doing. Once that happens, you'll start to see some sanity return to govt.
As it stands, Boner and the Con are not doing the job they were elected to do, in fact, quite the opposite, when at every turn, fight the people over the border issue.

Does that sound like a govt that wants to fix our illegal immigration issue?

Quote from: tac on March 30, 2015, 11:47:47 PM
Your points regarding education and welfare are valid points, but if they are state laws CONgress can and will do nothing.

The entire illegal snafu boils down to one thing - votes for the politicians. When the two parties are both pandering for the same vote, you can pretty well count on them never changing or enforcing any laws that will restrict that vote. New laws to restrict what the illegals get are a pipe dream and won't happen as long as the politicians want those votes. The problem isn't the laws it's the politicians, they are the things that need to be changed.

In the mean time, enforce the current laws, if you can,and many of these illegals will probably self deport. Until we get Constitutional conservatives running the states and the federal government, don't expect any change from so called conservatives like Bush.

Which is basically the point I am making. In fact I made the point about feds not being able to do anything about state laws twice. And got called a koolaid drinker for it.

We can enforce federal laws (assuming we can elect a large enough congressional majority of true conservatives), and we should. But doing so will be shoveling back the tide with a teaspoon as long as states like commiefornia continue with their laws that literally bribe people to risk their lives to come here and F up our economy.

IF we want to be able to address the problem of illegal immigration WITHOUT a continual heavy economic drain, we need to get rid of all laws which bribe people to come in, and strengthen laws which encourage them to use the legal route to U.S. residency and/or citizenship. But that can not happen only at the federal level.

Meanwhile, anything even remotely resembling anything that distantly approaches amnesty will simply increase the problem by a couple orders of magnitude.

Frankly, I haven't a foggy clue what to do about anchor babies, since the Constitution itself defines them as citizens.  Do we take them away from their parents and send the parents packing? That's a hell of a harsh solution.

QuoteIF we want to be able to address the problem of illegal immigration WITHOUT a continual heavy economic drain, we need to get rid of all laws which bribe people to come in, and strengthen laws which encourage them to use the legal route to U.S. residency and/or citizenship. But that can not happen only at the federal level.

How you you go about doing that? Given the current CONgress, I'd say that's impossible in the short term, and a maybe in the long term. Replacing the progressives in both parties is not a short term,one or two election cycles, process. We didn't get to this point in one, two or even three elections cycles, it has taken decades for the progressives (from both parties) to seize power, ousting them can be done but not in time to same this country from those that will destroy it with an amnesty program or not enforcing immigration laws. The laws are not the problem,in most cases,it's the politicians and the morons that elect them and pass these laws or refuse to enforce them. You can't rely on the voting booth to term limit these people, it doesn't work!

It's not that I disagree with what you are saying, it's just that you cannot force the current crop of politicians to do what you want. That goes for the state as well as the federal level.

Quote from: tac on March 31, 2015, 02:41:52 AM
How you you go about doing that? Given the current CONgress, I'd say that's impossible in the short term, and a maybe in the long term. Replacing the progressives in both parties is not a short term,one or two election cycles, process. We didn't get to this point in one, two or even three elections cycles, it has taken decades for the progressives (from both parties) to seize power, ousting them can be done but not in time to same this country from those that will destroy it with an amnesty program or not enforcing immigration laws. The laws are not the problem,in most cases,it's the politicians and the morons that elect them and pass these laws or refuse to enforce them. You can't rely on the voting booth to term limit these people, it doesn't work!

It's not that I disagree with what you are saying, it's just that you cannot force the current crop of politicians to do what you want. That goes for the state as well as the federal level.

Amen!  'twill be no easy or quick fix.  It must start somewhere very soon though as the future generation is being so indoctrinated that conservative change won't happen with them.  It must start with us in order for the next generation to have a chance to survive.

If we cannot rely on voters to term-limit our elected criminals, there's always this thought, from the Rev. G. K. Chesterton....