Listen Up Muchacho ...

... you have your head lodged squarely up your ass!!!!!


As clearly stated in the Constitution, any child born in the US is a US Citizen, with all the rights, privileges, and guarantees found therein (see 14th Amendment). Thus, the immigration status of the parents of an unknown number (but well over 4.5 million) of children CITIZENS of this Nation should have no bearing on the CITIZEN's ability to use the SCHIPs system.

DUFUS - the question I cut and pasted IS for the child too!! It was listed for both the applying parent and the child. Sheesh - of course I know if you're born here you're a citizen. I am not surprised at all though that you assumed the "poor kids" were citizens - THEY'RE NOT! If you don't believe me, check the site yourself - http://nevadacheckup.nv.gov/OnlineAppEnglish.htm

****

I can not tell you how utterly despicable I find this statement ...

159,000 of the finest, best-trained and best-equipped troops the world has ever seen struggle to "secure" ONE CITY against less than 10% of their number in armed insurgents for FOUR YEARS! How much harder will it be to "secure" 13,522 miles of US border and coastline against the prospect of 2,700 illegal entries A DAY?

We are kicking the shit out of them now, and FYI, I haven't heard of the illegals emerging on this side of the Rio with RPG's, IED's, AK-47's and the like! You moron! It apples and Cadillacs! In fact, given that we are turning the tide in Iraq, I would say that our boys would be more than capable to fend off unarmed civilians SIMPLY BY THEIR PRESENCE! But I want you to say it - say our military would fail if they were ordered to non-lethally secure our border - go ahead I dare ya.... just write the words - THE US MILITARY WOULD FAIL.

****

In fact on every issue here you have turned night into day and up down -

My point from the very beginning has simply been that the reason these people are "illegal" is that the system by which their status is determined is failing at every possible level of operation

NO, NO, NO! They are ILLEGAL because they broke the law professor. I'm sick of this liberal, too cute by half redefinition of plain common sense.

****

And by the way Webster's New World Dictionary, Fourth Edition:

Crime n. - an act in violation of the law.

So take it up with Webster smart guy.

****
My beef with the afore mentioned "plan" of Ryan's is simply that no one has shown me that any kind of draconian immigration legislation, at present or in the past, has ever WORKED!

No one has tried it! Very clever, ask me to give you an example of a program working that's yet to be implemented! The one thing you were right about outside of denying social services to illegals (which shocked me since that includes the "poor little children") was that republicans have failed miserably on this issue. The thing that was "too of something" is too little back bone or political will to say and enact my common sense measures.

****

Here's where you're particularly out of touch to a level that even surprised me ....

If, as you have said in the past, the US public is as frustrated and angry over the illegal immigration problem as you are, then why did H.R.4437 get so little support from middle-class white America? Why was the polled public (which I admit is a very small percentage of actual numbers... but it is all we have) so against the Bill from it's inception? Why was the Party that champions such causes unable to get it through the Senate (36 of 202 Democrats in the House voted FOR the Bill... 18%!)? Why did over 1 million protesters take to the streets in 11 major US cities over a bill that would simply have made illegal ENTRY into this country a CRIMINAL act, and would have had very little effect on those already here?

Did I already use the word dufus? Shucks ... did you watch any of the news at all on this? Maybe because some of the protests were ones in which I drove through here in Vegas, meaning this was a BIG issue out here, our local news teams covered this more, and you don't understand what happened with these marches because of limited PA coverage. I'm stretching hard there to give you the benefit of the doubt. The truth is that in every poll I've seen roughly 70% of all Americans agree with me, Middle Class America - white, black and (legal) brown - opposed the afore mentioned bill, the "amnesty bill."The "millions" protesting were the illegals and their supporters like La Rasa, and other advocates of amnesty! Back me up here James - he's wrong on this. They were protesting that bill on their behalf! Thet thought it TOO STRINGENT. The other side, like me, thought it was AMNESTY! It was people like me, that called their elected leaders in the millions and demanded they kill this thing. And we were successful. You are WAY out to lunch on this thing. Those marchers (whose numbers were actually in the tens of thousands) weren't Joe and Jane six pack - that wasn't middle America, or hardly ANY Americans as far as I can tell - they were illegals! You're right though - they are more closely aligned with your thinking on this, but YOU are WAY outside the common man's (non politicians) mainstream on this. You don't even know who was protesting and for what - look it up if you don't believe me. People called their reps by the millions - and believe me, it came from both parties. The calls to kill that bill, from people of all political stripes overloaded email servers and jammed up the congressional phone lines for days on end - didn't you read about any of this? WE were the majority, the mainstream, the common sense advocate that killed that amnesty bill, and it was the illegals and their advocates on the fringes that protested that bill because what we considered amnesty they thought was too tough, and it was Joe and Jane America that squashed it. Sheeesh ....

The bottom line is this: A super majority of Americans want enforcement first, followed by deportation of illegals who have committed further crimes, followed by a "back of the line" path to citizenship for those who then remain. That EXACT line was recited by both Obama (just tonight here in Vegas), Guliani, Hillary, Romney, Thompson, and now McCain. One of those people WILL be president. The "enforcement first" crowd has become a majority, hit a critical mass, and it WILL HAPPEN. I only hope it's before a city goes up in smoke at about 10,000 degrees. And trust me, if it's a Republican that wins, the wall will get built - he doesn't need to pass that, THAT is already law, all he has to do is get it funded.

My belief is that a wall - both real and virtual - manned to the teeth; a systematic deportation of "two time" criminals (they have commited a crime beyond their mere presence - 29% of federal prisons are illegal aliens sentenced for just that); multi billion dollar fines for hiring illegals; very public ICE raids; and denial of ALL social services to illegals (let alone credit cards), and THERE. There you have a common sense approach of stopping the leak in the boat, then addressing the repairs. It's what a super majority of Americans want. And the cost? A lot - but I bet less then the net cost illegals cost us now, and A HELL OF OF A LOT LESS then the human toll of another 9/11 ... or something much, much worse.

Anyone whom disagrees with that approach is allowing something (emotion, ignorance etc) to interfere with their natural God given common sense. So quit telling me to "show you where it has worked." At some point in the future, given the "enforcement first" crowd is the majority, a plan similar to this will be implemented. If it fails, I'll be the first to admit I was wrong, so until it is put into place we might as well suspend debate on it. At least I have a plan outside of setting up photo ID shops on the border, and jamming them in here without medical cexams, English proficiency, and accurate background checks - THAT would be a disaster, not to mention not a single candidate (outside of Kucinich) on either side is advocating that.

My plan won't fail. It's based on common sense and fair play - it's an American plan ... to save Americans.


FR