 |
|
Back to Home Page
December 07, 2006
2006 Latino National Survey Released FAIR Was There
Today a panel of Latino academics released the The findings demonstrate that the Latino population has many differences depending not only on national origin, years and generation in the U.S., racial and political identification, and also depending on in which state they live. Many of the findings represent no surprise, such as the fact that more Latinos identify with the Democrats rather than Republicans, but it is interesting that the data show a decline of identification with both parties for representing the concerns of the respondents. A plurality (48%) favors allowing “…more Latin Americans to come and work in this country legally.” Nearly as many favor no change (32%) or a reduced number (12%). One of the remarkable findings is that a large majority (70% to 26%) agreed that, “…the government should create a data base of all legal workers and require verification by employers before hiring a worker.” This is especially noteworthy because the current voluntary verification system precludes verification before hiring to preclude the system being used to discriminate against job applicants who would not have the chance to challenge a governmental database error which could create a “no match” finding. -- Jack Martin, Special Projects Director for FAIR ITS EASY AND FAST TO CHECK LEGAL PAPERS BEFORE HIRING SOMEONE CHEAP I could do it for anyone on the internet, its called a background check. The American Employers who hire illegals are the worse form of thugs on this blog. Posted by: Softwarengineer on December 7, 2006 07:03 PMThank you, Jack and thank you, FAIR for this report. So, 48% of Latinos want more Latinos? Thats understandable, don't you think, Human Being? Posted by: Bill Dexter on December 8, 2006 07:34 AM"The American Employers who hire illegals are the worse form of thugs on this blog." DITTO. Posted by: -S- on December 9, 2006 09:29 PM"A plurality (48%) favors allowing '…more Latin Americans to come and work in this country legally.'" Hispanics have to be made to face the fact that they are involved in ethnic supremacy. They refer to it as "the people" while who "the people" are are Hispanics, people their nationalities and ethnicities. They exclude everyone else while engaging in decided preferences for their own kind based upon ethnic terms, and, are involved in racism against darker and lighter people of various kinds. Unitl Hispanics can face that fact and learn what it means and confront themselvse about this, the problems will continue, because, Hispanics are exemplifying just what ethnic supremacy actually is: perpetrating special privilege for their own kind based upon ethnicity while denigrating others based upon their ethnicities and races. As long as Hispanics avoid this, the entire issue of immigration and even lawful, civic behavior and responsibilities will continue to be marginalized into an issue of ethnicity, skin color and some sense of supremacy involved in that. It hurts them as an ethnicity (immensely) in the eyes of others, it hurts everyone else by being forced to interact with it and survive the problems that result. There's a point where we have to say, "enough Hispanics," as in a quota system, if they can't and won't understand that just because someone is Hispanic, that that does not mean they're entitled to all at the expense of everyone else. Posted by: -S- on December 9, 2006 09:36 PM All of these articles covering illegal immigration and the obvious outcome for the future of America only reaches to a certain group of legal American citizens. Why? Because a percent of legal citizens don't care_don't read_don't even know where the hell Iraq is much less understand the mess with illegal immigration and the mass corruption that comes with it. After all is said and done, America as we knew her to be (a great soveriegn free country, warts and all) will cease to exist as such. Judges, lawyers, elected officials and congress along with a very stupid president sitting in the white house have guaranteed that our middle class will go away. With massive insourcing and outsourcing coupled with a generation of lazy americans as well as political correctness and multiculturalism (we are citizens of the world) philosophies, America is doomed. Oh I know that to those reading my comments this is the call to surrender. I have not surrendered. I am making an observation. I would even hope for a civil war if it were possible to cleanse this nation of it's deeply embedded corruption. It won't happen because the country is a fractured one. Lobbyist/special interest_politicians_big business_non american owned businesses_a growing population leaning upon government assistance for just about everything_a news media incapable of straight forward non political non partisian reporting_and the list goes on is a bitch's brew promising chaos, death and mayhem on the horizon.......... Posted by: Frank on December 10, 2006 10:05 AMFrank, I think you've just about said it all. I've come to the conclusion, over and over again, that unless Americans change, radically, nothing, absolutely nothing, involving government corruption will change for the better, but only get worse. You would think that millions upon millions of Americans would not only be mad, but burning up with anger over what is happening to this country, but no, they go merrily on their way, oblivious to how business and the whores it employs(politicians) are destroying this nation. Outside of the people who post here and others, most Americans are'nt even aware of it all. Posted by: Bobby on December 11, 2006 04:26 PMFrank and Bobby - You're right. However, I think the political correctness and adversion to racism ingrained into us has caused this. Think about saying something and someone else objecting and calling you a racist. The first thing you get is an adrenalin rush. That's called the fight or flight response. Political correctness has bred us to feel flight with even the murmur of the term "racist." Hispanics have been trained to use this. That's why they always pay the race card. Organizations like FAIR with the provision of information and this discussion board allow us to overcome the flight response and get educated enough to feel in the right and use the adrenalin to fight. And fight we will until we affect enough people around us to promote the needed change. MALDEF, LULAC, LA RAZA, ACLU, MEChA need to be exposed to the general public as the racist organizations they are, not the benovolent organizations they present themselves as. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has always had a horrible reputation. Well, why put up with it? Just because something is as it is doesn't mean it can't be changed. When I was in high school, blacks had to ride at the back of the bus. That changed. Russia was beating us in space exploration. Kennedy initiated a lot of programs... man, we had to exercise hard in physical ed and had to take more algebra and science courses. That was in the early 60's. In 1969, we landed on the moon. Women burned their bras for equality... and now we have to work outside the home in addition to working at home. I myself had to wear a girdle in addition to the bra because of US Navy regulations. And a lot of people protested the Viet Nam war and we had to leave. I myself got spit on because I was wearing a uniform. It doesn't take long when there's enough people yelling. And people have begun yelling... finally. I myself, again... watched that dang Mexican flag be flown along side ours 20 years ago and no one said a thing. Several of us have been fighting a school teacher, obviously MEChA, in letters to the editor in the local paper. The editor would come out with editorials and say things like "Why don't we just have open borders?" Well, MALDEF and ACLU came down on the school system and we now have ESL students in the buildings while English-speaking students are out in the trailers we had to buy to handle the influx. Reasoning printed in the paper: "so they can be close to the bathrooms." I've also been sending the editor FYI things from various places like FAIR. So, the Mexicans finally crossed the line and demanded that an election day be changed because it interferred with their Virgin of the Guadalupe day or whatever. The editor not only did a poll in which people were able to say NO, he printed his editorial telling them voting didn't take that long and there was always absentee voting and they should be able to make arrangements. So we have progress. And as we go along, the aggressiveness of the politically active Hispanics where they try to force their culture upon us to be all inclusive is beginning to irritate Americans. Once irritated enough, they will become vocal. We just have to remain politically active ourselves and very verbal with rightous indignation and armed with facts until that occurs. And we need to be rightously indignant NOW so that the incoming Congress does not think we have become complacent. During this recess, flood their offices with everything you can think of. There are a lot of bills coming up concerning the North American Union and immigration. Congress needs to confront mountains of objections to them when they get back. Posted by: Faye on December 12, 2006 03:53 AMDemocrats May Take Harder Line on Immigration Enforcement "The selection of Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-Texas) to head the Intelligence During the campaign, the democrats were blasting the Bush admin. about border security. Its promising to see someone actually putting their money where their mouth is, but we should hold the Dems accountable to their criticisms so we can actually achieve real reform in the abscence of a pro-business legislature. Posted by: E on December 7, 2006 02:51 PMI do not for one moment believe the Democrats will take a hard-line on immigration. This is crap, to tout this as their reality, when one just has to look at the voting records of this collective group of liberals on many web sites, NumbersUSA being one of them, and see all those Ds and Fs. They are for rewarding illegals at every turn, whether it is in creating sanctuary city policies or forcing the police to fail to do their jobs. They are consistently the lawmakers siding with the lawbreakers over the lawabiding. Screw these liberals, who just go with the tide failing to come up with a policy they will stick to. They don't seem to understand that the best example of future behavior is past and present behavior. As far as their immigration plans, they are George Soros' puppets and when his hand is up their collective patooties, they will do his bidding to get the cash. Sorry, no cigar and no way will I believe this will ever happen. As I keep saying, I will never, ever, ever, vote for another liberal in my entire life. They are clueless as clueless can be--especially regarding this debate. Screw me once, shame on you, screw me twice, shame on me. Keep screwing me for decades and both of us have serious issues. Liberals hate America and are hell bent on punishing all of us and destroying her for what they believe it is our nation has done to the world--besides save every crazy country's a**es. Yadda, yadda, yadda is all that I hear these nutjobs saying. Stop giving them attention and maybe they will crawl into the nearest hole they can find. Posted by: jaded on December 7, 2006 02:59 PMILLEGALS CAN`T VOTE, SO THESE TRAITOR POLITICIANS SHOULD WORRY MORE ABOUT ALIENATING AMERICAN VOTERS, AND NOT THE ILLEGALS... THIS JUST MORE DOUBLE TALK AND B.S... I`LL BELIEVE IT WHEN I SEE IT. Posted by: American Me on December 7, 2006 03:12 PMI hope the author of this article is correct. The gov't. could save lots of money and be very effective by just, continuing the wall, prosecuting all employers and letting the Border Patrol do their job. Posted by: Ella on December 7, 2006 03:46 PMThis is promising news. The Democratic Party has been rebuilding itself from the ground up, and this article seems evidence of a new, populist attitude within the party. Even the business community will ultimately benefit, I would argue, by maintaining a strong middle class in the country. Posted by: FCannon on December 7, 2006 04:05 PMForgive my doubting Thomas attitude, but with Silvestre Reyes, heading this up, I don't feel very assured about action being taken. There are only a few Mexican politicians I've read about, who have put American border security, over race. I hope I'm totally wrong about Reyes. I'm sure he will get quite a few visits from the "human rights" Mexican/hispanic raza groups. We all know their names by now. Posted by: Bobby on December 7, 2006 04:12 PMHope you're right, FCannon. Smoke and mirrors so that we will believe that donkeys can fly is more likely. I'll try to stay positive, but repubs let conservatives down so badly for so long, it still hurts. Sounds a lot like the same unfulfilled promises that bush made for many years. Trusting the government to do anything right is like a fairy tale to me. Not sure I trust one word from any of them. Particularly depressed since I just heard Karl Rove's speech, where he abandoned all hope of controlling illegals, therefore we "need to just give up and invite them all in". God help us. Posted by: Jeebie on December 7, 2006 05:23 PMWE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF OUR OWN FIRST The Democrats are suppose to be the Party of the little guy, that's the American worker. Something has to give when our American college graduates have no jobs and adding more slave labor is making it far worse. They know, back the American worker of kiss your job good-bye in 2008. Posted by: Softwarengineer on December 7, 2006 06:49 PMIt will just be a prelude to an amnesty, followed by mass increases in mass legal immigration. In 1986, these were the promises I recall were made in return for the amnesty: 1. Illegal immigration would be kept in check. And from Hispanics: We will cost you nothing. We will only contribute. Posted by: James on December 7, 2006 08:05 PMI am a 'Lou Dobbs Democrats' ....Lou Dobbs is the Man!!! Now, who is going to come looking for my vote in 2008! Posted by: Jeff on December 7, 2006 11:55 PMTHIS BEARS REPEATING (by "Jade"): "I do not for one moment believe the Democrats will take a hard-line on immigration. This is crap, to tout this as their reality, when one just has to look at the voting records of this collective group of liberals on many web sites, NumbersUSA being one of them, and see all those Ds and Fs. They are for rewarding illegals at every turn, whether it is in creating sanctuary city policies or forcing the police to fail to do their jobs. They are consistently the lawmakers siding with the lawbreakers over the lawabiding..." Well said! So very true. I do not at all believe Rahm Emanuel. Look at the situation in Illionois, for starters, to see who and what Emanuel (and Dick Durbin) are all about, and look at the Democrat sanctuary city efforts nationwide and where illegal aliens are mostly congregated (Chicago is at the top of the list along with Los Angeles, Miami and New York, all Democrat enclaves, mostly all areas that prevent law enforcement from even being possible against and about illegal immigraion (and even punish law enforcement personnel for any attempts to enforce the laws). I noticed an utter silence from among Democrats in the year leading up to November 06, 2006 elections, a near silence about illegal immigration other than various Governors blaming the "federal government" for illegal immigration while they did all possible in their various states to avoid penalizing illegal aliens and to prevent further illegal immigration (I refer everyone to the situation in Arizona for starters, CA second, FL and Illinois and NY next). The Democrats literally avoided the entire issue of illegal immigration and especially made no mention about penalties and efforts to discontinue illegal immigration. Instead, most Liberals literally focused on denigrating "NeoCons" and Conservatives about the problem as if Democrats had no involvement and no clue as to how the problem came to be and has continued (incentives for illegal aliens is how, and lax to nonexistent law enforcement and deterrants is the other 'how'). It'd be great if we as a nation could hold Democrats' ethical feet to the fire at this early stage and not let up on the heat for the years ahead because Democrats have been among the most indulgent and enticing of and about illegal immigration and yet have done so even more surreptiously and covertly than have those brazen Conservatives who've been employing illegals. We have to challenge Rahm Emanuel and Durbin and others like these to prove that they mean what they are NOW saying because they certainly have not been acting in line with what they're trying to present now. A meaningful starting place by Democrats would be to end sanctuary status for cities and towns and vote with the rest of us to stop providing taxpayer funded educations, healthcare and so many other "freebies" to illegal aliens in the U.S. Stop the incentives, apply meaningful penalties for violating our laws, remove preventions to law enforcement (all of them) from enforcing our laws and we will eventually stem the problem of illegal aliens in our nation today. The last thing that ever should occur is amnesty. Someone who has broken so many of our laws by entering and remaining in our nation illegally by way of false pretense afterward is the least among us deserving of citizenship. It's an outrageous affront to our Constitution to even entertain such an idea as citizenship for illegal aliens being "bestowed" upon them as if a King or Queen was doling out favors. Just outrageously non-democratic a notion, entirely treacherous in my view. Posted by: -S- on December 9, 2006 09:24 PM-S-, I could not agree with you more. It is utterly unbelievabe, that the representatives we vote for, are allowing this stuff, that IS entirely treacherous, as you say. Also, I want to thank You, Jaded , and so many others on this site, for clarifying all of the different perspectives on illegal immigration. I thank even Human Being, Crocker, Ralph, People James and those who state their views, though I disagree with them vehemently, but they make debate possible. Everyones time is valuable. Legal and illegal immigration, is, for me, an illustration of how democracy is or isn't working. It's one of those huge issues that tests whether the voices and concerns of American citizens are being heard or whether other voices, that have no place above the American citizens, are prevailing. Those who are alert, can see that this struggle is about issues much more serious, than whether someone who comes here illegally, works hard or not. Posted by: Bobby on December 10, 2006 06:20 PMBush = direliction of Duty,not upholding the LAWS of the USA. He swore an Oath to do so! Impeachment proceeding should be started! Hang all TRAITORS! Start at the top! Posted by: Critter on December 11, 2006 07:10 AMDHS Decides Immigration Isn't Enough of Mickey Mouse Affair, Wants to Emulate Magic Kingdom "Faced with a decline in the number of overseas visitors and unpopular Probably the biggest thing they could do to encourage visitors AND make this country safe is to get the ENTRY/EXIT program in place and USE IT. It's a lot easier to be welcoming when you know who people are, and that you can track them down if they don't leave. Posted by: Ali on December 7, 2006 11:20 AMWE ARE BEING THREATENED LIKE ISRAEL OR WORSE! Mexico and Central America are literally INVADING, OCCUPYING and CONQUERING the USA. We can't allow tourism to facilitate the invasion. I dont really know what to say- Now I ask you, ? ma I dnurk? Commodified Niceness THIS IS JUST RIDICULOUS! Posted by: American Me on December 7, 2006 01:15 PMOur English language represents a mighty arsenal which contains in excess of one million vocabulary words.* In spite of that, I do not think that there is one for the facts above. I guess all the xenophobes are getting, for now, is this #1 place which should make a lot of people in this blog profoundly happy and proud. Let's deter ANYONE and EVERYONE from coming to this country even if it is legally, even if they just want to come visit and spend their money here. I guess that is going to hurt business and most of you may already be celebrating, as some employ illegal aliens and may be forced to downscale or go out of business altogether, however some U.S. citizens will also feel the pinch, but as long as it screws even one illegal, who cares about the citizens, right? Let's keep throwing the baby with the water, although it doesn't make any sense to me I guess it makes sense to most of you... WAY TO GO!!! Posted by: Human Being on December 7, 2006 02:08 PMThe iron claws of the state should never undertake the management of something as delicate as culture. all attempts I have ever seen with my own eyes or read about in history have been nothing but cruel obsceneties perpetrated on entire populations. My definition of a hero is anyone, who would like to personally throw Mr. (mickeymouse) Rasulo, over the border, right where all of the drug and human smugglers are, so that he could give them a warm Disney greeting as they run over him. Another example of the pursuit of corporate greed, rather than worrying about the state your nation is in, and please don't give me that bull about being anti-business, Walt Disney was able to be a patriotic American, without selling out his country. Posted by: Bobby on December 7, 2006 04:03 PMHUMAN BEING, you're a dingbat.....no one is saying that we should deport LEGAL immigrants! Why do people like you INTENTIONALLY blur the distinction between legal and ILLEGAL immigrants -and then label others with 'xenophobe' and other erroneous titles? If you were truly a HUMAN BEING, you'd be advocating for illegal aliens to return to their home countries and MARCH IN THEIR OWN streets demanding rights! At least, then they would be legally deserving of them. Posted by: Dave on December 7, 2006 06:44 PMITS ALL A MOOT POINT Unless this country finds a quick replacement for the massive degradation in housing and manufacturing job losses for 2007, we'll have open borders to a Disneyland with no lines at the rides. Posted by: Softwarengineer on December 7, 2006 06:44 PMMore unfriendly than France? My, we have come up in the world. And my apologies to all tourists, but life here in bushs magic kingdom hasn't left us feelin' too agreeable, lately. Check back again after the regime change. Posted by: Jeebie on December 7, 2006 06:57 PMDave, FYI - You are posting messages on an ANT-IMMIGRANT website not ANTI-ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT one! Get a clue! All these xenophobic, racist sites are in favor of CLOSING THE BORDER and STOPPING IMMIGRATION ALTOGETHER!!! They want no immigrants, PERIOD! They are for a white-only country. They advocate low-paying jobs for African Americans and the deportation of anyone brown. There is a reason the KKK is now supporting their efforts. Posted by: Human Being on December 8, 2006 01:43 PMHuman Being, you obviously have no idea what constitutes law, the purpose or meaning. You ignoramous. All of these sites are in favor of UPHOLDING THE LAWS OF OUR LAND. That doesn't make us xenophobic or racist - it makes us LAW OBIDING and EXPECTING of our government to ENFORCE OUR LAWS. The U.S. takes in more LEGAL IMMIGRANTS annually than any other contry! We are a more diverse country than ANY latin american country - I garuantee you! Posted by: litew8 on December 9, 2006 04:46 AMDave, the reason people blur the distinction between legal and illegal is because confusion is their game. You know the type, everything is gray. You never reach a conclusion about anything. Not what to do with rapists, mass murderers, repeat child molesters, people in the country illegally, who might be causing mayhem,etc. The hallmark of the ultra liberal and subversive,(one and the same)is to keep the rules of the game changing, while all the while people are suffering because of the ultra liberals selfishness. Posted by: Bobby on December 9, 2006 06:25 PMlitew8, You are WRONG the countries with the most immigrants are Switzerland and Ireland (just check the percentage of foreign born citizens in those countries). Please check your facts. And please check with the xenophobes, they ARE anti-immigrant as in CLOSE ALL THE BORDERS to EVERYONE! They play the fear game to get people involved. Why do you think they are for CHANGING THE CONSTITUTION? Yes, they want to get rid of birthright "anchor babies" they are not for ENFORCING THE LAW they want to change it altogether. They are against all LEGAL ways of immigrating, you name them, H1-Bs, L1-Bs, tourist visas, diversity visa program, et al. They do not support enforcing the law, they just want to change it. GET A CLUE!!! Posted by: Human Being on December 11, 2006 01:28 PMI don't think I am wrong HB. I find it funny you do not attempt to provide any statistical facts to back up your argument. If I were so wrong, I'd think you'd be more than willing to provide proof positive information. While your at it, provide information reflecting the last 20 years or so. Then again, you choose not to comment on any of my other comments that debunk your other comments. You are invert. And you are WRONG. GET A CLUE as to what is actually occurring around the world, and why the U.S. has a RIGHT to protect itself - you ignoramous. Respond to my other comments. The U.S. CANNOT be xenophobic or racist if it is comprised of more diversity than ANY latin a. country, or most any other country in the world for that matter! You fool! Posted by: litew8 on December 15, 2006 06:09 AMlitew8, I never said the U.S. is xenophobic, but it does have quite a few of them. Enough to get these hate blogs going, and enough to try to get the growing minorities overturn. I gave you the facts, here are more. Enjoy! 20% of Swiss population is foreign born http://library.thinkquest.org/28952/trad_for.htm Posted by: Human Being on December 15, 2006 02:19 PMThe Swiss have 20% foriegners. Permanent residence of 7,490,000 as of August 2006. 20% of that equals roughly 1.5 million foriegners. They also have strict controls and culture exams. SOMETHING THAT IS NOT OCCURRING WITHIN OUR COUNTRY - DUE TO THE MASSIVE INFLUX OF ILLEGAL ALIENS ACTIVITY/NEGATIVE ECONOMICAL EFFECTS. If looked at over a 20 year run, there's no comparison what-so-ever compared to the ammount the U.S. accepts each year, LEGALLY. What is it? About 2 million? Like I said - "The U.S. CANNOT be xenophobic or racist if it is comprised of more diversity than ANY Latin American country, or most any other country in the world for that matter!" WE HAVE/CREATED LAWS FOR SPECIFIC REASON. Posted by: litew8 on December 16, 2006 05:00 AMlitew8, The U.S. has less than 12% of its population foreign born with over 1000% of the Swiss territory. We have laws that a few xenophobes want to change to reverse diversity and keep minorities in check. Although most of those laws are dysfunctional and outdated, the changes proposed by anti-immigrant racists would just make them more dysfunctional. Posted by: Human Being on December 18, 2006 01:37 PMHuman Being - NONE of what you are saying goes to imply that BREAKING OUR LAWS IS OK. MILLIONS OF PEOPLE ARE BREAKING OUR LAWS. IT'S YOUR OPINION THAT THEY ARE DYSFUNCTIONAL OR OUTDATED. NEITHER OF WHICH ARE JUSTIFIABLE REASONS FOR PEOPLE TO BREAK THE LAWS. I'm willing to bet that one of the laws you consider to be dysfunctional or outdated is the REQUIREMENT that the person being considered to enter our country actually is CAPABLE of SPEAKING ENGLISH, or has GOOD MORAL CHARACTER. Millions of people entering our country illegally has neither. They have not learned English, nor care to try. They do NOT have good moral character because they are WILLINGLY breaking the laws by entering our country illegally. THE U.S. DOES NOT WANT THIS TYPE OF IMMIGRANT. WE HAVE A RIGHT TO CHOOSE WHO IS ALLOWED INTO OUR COUNTRY. WHETHER YOU THINK IT IS FAIR OR NOT - TOO BAD! Posted by: litew8 on December 20, 2006 03:31 AMlitew8, FYI - There is NO requirement to speak English, that is dysfunctional. I do favor that requirement, but it does not exist. If the supply and demand exists and the current laws don't allow for it, it gets done unlawfully, which is wrong. Closing the borders would only make it worst. Illegal immigrants do not make an effort to learn English because they are unsure of when they might get deported and there is basically no incentive to do so, not even accessible classes they can attend. I could assure you that if there was any type of law in which one can just get in line (for a year or less, not 15+ years), pay an immigration fee, take an English test and undergo a background test, there would hardly be any illegal immigrants and all would speak the language. Most illegal immigrants came illegally because there was no legal way to do so. Why do you think illegal immigrants want to become legal? That would be FAIR! Posted by: Human Being on December 20, 2006 07:20 PMHumanB, you are WRONG AGAIN - Unless of course you are simply referring to some sort of a NON-EXISTING program. There is NO such program, therefore you are WRONG. Whether or not it is FAIR OR NOT has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ISSUE OF PEOPLE BEING HERE THAT ARE NOT SUPPOSE TO BE. THEY HAVE and ARE BREAKING OUR LAWS. NO IF ANDS OR BUTS ABOUT IT. Sure, you can assure to your hearts content - until you've allowed EVERYONE and ANYONE to come here to TAKE the money and LEAVE (predominately from a selected few countries is what it sounds like you are suggesting - since the majority are overwhelmingly from Mexico and other L.American countries - that's DISCRIMINATING to EVERYONE ELSE in the WORLD that would like to come here LEGALLY - and are waiting in line). And everything else you ASSUME, yea, right, whatever. Give them ONE year to be allowed to learn the language? THAT'S FUNNY. MOST ILLEGAL ALIENS ARE HERE BECAUSE THEY BROKE THE LAW. STOP BEING SO IGNORANT HB. Being able to come to the U.S. is like driving - IT IS A PRIVILAGE NOT A RIGHT. People learn (get EDUCATED-LEARN-HAVE A WILLINGNESS) to come here LEGALLY. COMMON REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE NATURALIZATION: * At least 18 years old DON'T BELIEVE ME? CHECK FOR YOURSELF: FOR YOU TO SAY IT IS NOT REQUIRED - You are absurd and invert like I said from the get-go. Maybe you should read over all of the REQUIREMENTS to better educate yourself. YOU ARE NOT FOOLING ANYONE WITH YOUR DOUBLE MISLEADING TALK. And if you think Americans are stupid, you're sadly mistaken. Posted by: litew8 on December 22, 2006 02:31 AMlitew8, Get your facts RIGHT! Maybe you missed the point where it says "lawful permanent resident (for not less than 5 years) and physical presence in the US" and that has to be after holding another status in case of employment or having a DIRECT family member sponsoring you. So it takes 10+ years to just become a legal permanent resident 15+ to become a citizen. If a decade or two are reasonable time for a DOCUMENT, they should do the same for all privileges, like driving... just wait and se how many people would be driving without a license. MOST ILLEGAL ALIENS ARE HERE ILLEGALY BECAUSE IT IS NEXT TO IMPOSSIBLE TO COME HERE LEGALLY. Posted by: Human Being on December 22, 2006 01:33 PMMY FACTS ARE STRAIGHT. Human Being wrote: REALLY, what is it that we've been discussing? Illegal aliens that broke our laws and entered the U.S., not speaking English, not learning nor caring to learn the history. They are in essence RESIDING here, ILLEGALLY. REQUIREMENT: I didn't miss any point. You are still trying to imply that they are here ILLEGALLY and that it is somehow OKAY with you because YOU FEEL it is not FAIR. Like I said before, IT IS A PRIVILAGE, NOT A RIGHT to be granted citizenship. Why do you think myself and the MAJORITY are disgusted by the fact there are Millions of people here ILLEGALLY. Illegals are contributing to the extensive waiting period, not helping it. There are people trying to come to the U.S. LEGALLY but can't because the economy is saturated by ILLEGAL ALIENS. Driving and acceptance into a country are two totally different types of privilages. Don't be so shallow. Posted by: litew8 on December 24, 2006 05:40 AMHB, I forgot to mention - You said: "for a DOCUMENT" BEING ALLOWED TO ENTER THE U.S. IS NOT JUST A DOCUMENT. THERE'S LOTS OF LEARNING/UNDERSTANDING INVOLVED IN BEING 'GRANTED' THE RIGHT TO COME INTO THE U.S.. If you think of it as being simply a 'document' - THERE LIES THE (your) PROBLEM. You don't have much pride in what consitutes granting people 'permission' to reside here. Go ask someone who just became a citizen and they will tell you how proud they are of themselves, what they've learned, and how the wait was worth every minute. Posted by: litew8 on December 24, 2006 05:48 AMlitew8, You are still as confused as ever... NOBODY NEEDS TO SPEAK ENGLISH to get a GREEN CARD! It is NOT in the book, and it should be. A green card IS NOT CITIZENSHIP. Of course folks who become citizens are proud, not only because they overcame 15+ years of bureaucracy but because they are very few who are eligible to do it, harder than winning the lottery. I dare you and any native born American to pass the citizenship test, especially the new one. I assure you, the majority would fail it. As long as the process keeps its dysfunctionality and it remains practically impossible to come here legally, illegal immigration will never stop. Posted by: Human Being on December 26, 2006 02:03 PMThe discussion is not about native born Americans. It NEVER WAS and WILL NEVER BE. This is about a large number of people that are RESIDING here that were NEVER given permission. It is call ILLEGAL.
Because my country has worked our tails off to create a functional supporting economy, DOES NOT GIVE ANYONE AND THEIR FAMILY (OUTSIDE) RIGHTS TO COME HERE ILLEGALLY. We are NOT the worlds wellfare country. 1st and FOREMOST, if illegal aliens do not understand the principles envolved in LAW, you probrably SHOULDN'T be allowed to come here anyway. The U.S. cannot be so passive by granting everyone and anyone to come here. Particularly an overwhelming majority from one region. It has never been that way and it shouldn't be easy to legally come here. We, as a country, have every right in the WORLD to make, ENFORCE, and UPHOLD LAW. P.S. I garantee you, if I were from another country and I wanted to reside in the U.S., I'd study and learn to pass the immigration test with FLYING COLORS. JUST LIKE MILLIONS HAVE DONE - PAST AND PRESENT. My conversation is over with you. My country has enough problems to deal with, let alone the millions of people here illegally that are demanding rights all the while setting up camp. U.S. CITIZENS DO NOT DO THIS TO OTHER COUNTRIES, AND WE DON'T EXPECT OTHER TO ATTEMPT IT HERE. WE EXPECT PEOPLE TO ABIDE BY OUR LAWS, TRADITIONS, AND POLICY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Posted by: litew8 on December 27, 2006 02:42 AMlitew8, "My conversation is over with you" ... I guess you couldn't just admit you were wrong and just like many ignorant people do not know the difference between a green card and citizenship. You are part of the problem, not part of the solution. BTW - You misspelled "DISFUNCTIONAL" Posted by: Human Being on December 27, 2006 01:25 PMThat's it Human B., stray from the topic when you are cornered. Attempt to redirect attention by stating unrelated issues. Try to garnish pitty. By all means, DON'T attempt to answer any of the other points I addressed. Typical of someone who knows they are wrong. Addressing ANY of the other points would obviously expose your ignorance. Not to worry HB, your ignorance was exposed anyway - by not adressing them - only now, you know. I'd never admit I'm wrong when I know (I'm not) the overwhelming majority of issues I discussed casts a much larger negative shadow onto my country and it's legal residents than that of which you base your debate upon. You did not say anything that justifies illegal activity. Nothing you said AT ALL justifies the illegal actions of so many - NO MATTER HOW HARD YOU TRY. Maybe what we need is to have a reverse migration. Maybe 20 million U.S. citizens should occupy south of the border countries. Maybe 'we' should build their countries for them. Maybe that's what they need. Of course, they'd have to change their schools to teachings to English, give us free healthcare, free government handouts, etc... etc... etc... Do you think they could do this for us if we voluntarily crossed the border illegally? Maybe we should try. By the way, thanks for spell checking my post. litew8, "My conversation is over with you" was not true after all, so not only you are ignorant, but full of empty promises. "I'd never admit I'm wrong" that's what ignorant people do... And by doing that, thy keep being ignorant. I still think that anyone applying for a green card should speak English, and that is still not in our books. Posted by: Human Being on December 28, 2006 02:35 PMSenators Grill DHS on Visa Fraud "U.S. Sen. Susan Collins has sent letters to the heads of the U.S. Department "Senators Grill DHS on Visa Fraud" I'm sorry, but this headline made me start to laugh, almost histerically. I would bet that thousands of people who read this headline, felt somewhere in between laughing and crying. I can see it now. Chertoff is sitting in a chair, with an intense light pointed at him, and some of the tough Senators we have(don't ask me who they might be), are grilling him and blowing cigarette smoke at him ,while saying loudly," I don't believe you, I think you're lying." Like in some hollywood movie. It probably will be more like, could you please get back to us with the answers to our questions--in about two years. Thank you. Posted by: Bobby on December 7, 2006 04:24 PMI IMAGINE THEY SELL MASS FAKE VISAs AND GREEN CARDS ON THE INTERNET TOO How many foreigner guests are still here that shouldn't be? I know, we're too busy reading the Iraq Report to care. Posted by: Softwarengineer on December 7, 2006 06:54 PMI suspect that guestworker personnel firms open ghost offices in States like Maine (and others) for two reasons. 1. Various States will enforce, "Employment Agreements," some consullting firms charge processing fees up front and sue non-compliant H1bs for administration costs in State(s) where the worker has never even visited. 2. The target State has a lower prevailing wage. Many of these H1Bs, in effect, purchase the visa and languish without unemployment as long as they have a "relationship" with the sponsoring consulting firm (administrative leave for instance) they are "in status." Even though the H visa is a non-immigrant-visa these people have an expectation of citizenship (for enduring hardship?) The consulting firm also controls the guestworker through the EB1 visa process. Once the guestworker obtains status, he has a good chance of beoming another unemployed American. The "brightest and the best" are having a hard time swallowing the fact that they themselves are replacement workers and are destined to be replaced. weaver Posted by: Weaver on December 8, 2006 12:34 PMWeaver, Get a clue and do your research. H1-Bs MUST prove they are working for the sponsor through pay stubs, especially if they are to renew their work permit. Although an H1-B is a non-immigrant visa, it has DUAL INTENT and allows the H1-B holder to change status through a sponsor to a permanent visa. There is no "enduring hardship" clause. H1-Bs cannot file for unemployment even when they pay taxes just as any U.S. citizen. Getting permanent status through sponsorship takes between 5-8 YEARS! You make it sound as a simple step just to get all the H1-Bs to apply for unemployment as soon as they become permanent residents. In any event, green card holders usually will not apply for unemployment as it could set them back or make it altogether impossible to become citizens, which takes another 5 YEARS! So if you want to think people with advanced degrees will go through this 20+ year process just to be unemployed, well you need a reality check. It is clear Ms. Collins is not aware of the process either... another bureaucrat who does not know how the process works... what's new? Before getting approval for either a green card or citizenship, one must undergo a background check by the FBI and submit fingerprints. I would think they check those against terror watch lists too, so Ms. Collins is mistaken about that too. Posted by: Human Being on December 8, 2006 01:59 PM In our History have we EVER! had a more CORRUPT! Pro Patria! Posted by: Critter on December 11, 2006 07:13 AM |
findings of an opinion poll among U.S. Hispanics taken by phone in June (the poll showed no clear overall preference for either the Latino and Hispanic terms). The questions probed a very large range of issues including racial identification, English assimilation, remittances, immigration policy, the Latino marches, political affiliation and identification, “most important” issues and “problems” facing Latinos, etc. The data set is vast and has not been fully mined, but the findings that are so far available 
Committee may be an indication that Democrats will press the Bush administration to crack down on employers who hire illegal immigrants. Reyes, a former Border Patrol agent, is one of the most outspoken proponents of enforcing these types of employer sanctions and appears to have an ally in Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), who will be the House caucus chairman next year. In an interview with The Hill earlier this year, Emanuel said many Democrats want to focus on employer sanctions as a way to stem illegal immigration. He accused the White House and the Republican-led Congress for letting 'its guard down when it comes to employer sanctions,'" DC insider newspaper The Hill reports. "Reyes is a cosponsor of a bill by Rep. Charles Gonzalez (D-Texas) to increase enforcement of sanctions against employers of illegal aliens. And while the Judiciary Committee has lead jurisdiction on immigration reform, Reyes has argued that lax enforcement on illegal immigrants jeopardizes national security, which is under his panel’s purview . . . Democrats are expected to seek to permanently bridge the gap with 'Lou Dobbs Democrats' that voted for 'fair trade' policies, while avoiding alienating an expanding Hispanic voting bloc. In focusing on employer sanctions, Democrats hope to appear tough on border security and illegal immigration while avoiding alienating most voters."
entry requirements, the U.S. government is turning to the Walt Disney Co. and other theme park operators to brighten the country's battered image. With security much tightened since the attacks of September 11, 2001, the visa and entry processes are so unpopular that the country was ranked as the world's most unfriendly to visitors in a survey last month of travelers from 16 nations," Reuters reports. "'We have missed an opportunity to make people feel welcome,' said Jay Rasulo, chairman of Walt Disney Parks and Resorts. 'The whole process must be friendlier and more efficient. We must invest in creating a first impression of hospitality and friendliness at our borders.'"
Comments