View Poll Results: Most Effective Way to Deal With Illegal Immigrant Already in the US ? ?

Voters
69. You may not vote on this poll
  • Provide a way for them to gain citizenship

    11 15.94%
  • Provide Amensty

    0 0%
  • Put them on on bus/plane/train back HOME

    54 78.26%
  • Don't know - Don't care

    4 5.80%
Page 5 of 6 First 123456 Last
  1. #45

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,400
    Thanks
    849
    Thanked 444 Times in 312 Posts
    I can resolve this issue...release these illegals into the custody of those in this administration including the president. let's see how they would like having to share a home with these individuals. i'm sure they would just love breaking bread with these poor detained individuals who have been unfairly treated separated from their families (let's let their families also move in), deprived of 200% of the benefits that some americans get...NOT!!!!!!!!!! another case of NOT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement New "Immigration Bill" Poll
    Join Date
    Always
    Posts
    Many
     

  3. #46
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    Big surprise. The liars were lying.

    Reports the AP:
    "The Homeland Security Department released from its jails 'more than 2,000' illegal aliens facing deportation in recent weeks supposedly due to looming budget cuts and planned to release 3,000 more during March. The newly disclosed figures, cited in internal budget documents reviewed by the AP, are significantly higher than the "few hundred" illegal aliens the Obama administration acknowledged this week had been released."
    And Janet Incompetanto STILL claims she knew nothing about it. How many "more" than 2,000 were released, and where, and what crimes did they commit? She won't tell us, nor the governors or Sheriffs of the states where these criminal aliens were set free. Disgraceful.
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  4. #47
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  5. #48
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    Any immigration plan without citizenship ‘as an endpoint’ will not work
    [VIDEO]
    1:56 PM 03/10/2013

    In his book “Immigration Wars,” Former Florida Republican Gov. Jeb Bush argued that undocumented immigrants should not be eligible for a path to citizenship — but in his roundabout book tour, he has acknowledged that what’s in his book differs from what he has been saying rather publicly.

    On Sunday’s “This Week” on ABC, immediately following an appearance from Bush, Washington Post columnist George Will reacted to Bush’s “flexibility.”

    “Everett Dirksen, the leader of Senate Republicans for many years said, ‘I have my principles and one of mine is flexibility,’ and Mr. Bush is flexible on treating the 11 million who are here already,” Will said. “The immigration debate today is occurring after two years in which net immigration from Mexico, which is the most important source of immigrants, has been approximately zero. Most important capital is not Washington, D.C. — it’s Mexico City, where they have their economy doing A, better than ours and B, being a magnet to help people stay there, so what we’re really arguing about is what to do about the 11 million illegal immigrants who are here already, and I think what we learned this week was any plan that does not envision as an end point citizenship for those is not going to work.”


    Will’s co-panelist, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, wasn’t impressed with some of Bush’s policy solutions. But he said his evolving position is a positive development.

    “You know, anyway, that was impressive,” Krugman said. “It’s an object lesson. I mean, he’s just shown us the perils of political pandering. He wrote a book for the immigration debate the way it was a few months ago and got caught flat-footed by the way it shifted. But, no, this is moving in a favorable direction. We seem to be moving toward some … this is one of those things that has been an amazing positive development. Most of these other things — I don’t think we’re getting anywhere on the budget.”

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/03/10/ge...#ixzz2NAbWzoM3

    comments

    Anyone who enters ANY country ILLEGALLY... and then DEMANDS that they be allowed to stay after ILLEGALLY OBTAINING A SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER TO WORK and sucking off the system for years ..... NEEDS TO BE THROWN OUT AND NEVER ALLOWED TO RETURN !

    ...

    What happened to just enforcing the existing law? Why has that become so foreign? We used to be a nation of laws.

    ..

    We already did the amnesty thing once under Reagan and were promised two primary things by Congress.

    1. That the borders would be securred; and,

    2. That we would never do this again.

    If we want to solve the problem quickly and economically we just announce that as of May 1 we will return to the "Wanted Dead or Alive" bounty system and offer a $1,000.00 reward for illegal aliens. Then just don't get in the way of the border for the next several weeks. Problem solved.

    ...

    The GOP is already in demographic extinction... I couldn't care less about them. What you apparently forget is that there are MANY Democrats that are jobless due to illegal aliens... especially African Americans that would be more than happy to see them go. And African Americans stand to lose the highest percentage of jobs to "legalized" illegal aliens. Sad, but true. Democrats are shoving African Americans one rung down the ladder to make room for illegal aliens. Then of course, there are the fine, upstanding LEGAL immigrants that did it the right way, and upstanding REAL American born Hispanics that are not happy that they'll have to compete for jobs against those that came here illegally. Together, that may represent a significant (in terms of today's close elections) voting block that both parties are discarding; not that they care.

    ..

    Maybe a way to stay and work... but citizenship, never. Citizenship should be reserved for those that followed the law and came here legally. If the illegal aliens want citizenship they'll have to leave immediately for their home country, apply at the U.S. embassy, get the health and background checks and wait their turn to come back at the end of the line. If they return in the interim, their place in line will be cancelled and they should lose any more chances to come here legally. If they have a criminal record or have taken government aid while here illegally, they should never be eligible for citizenship, period.

    ..

    How about citizenship after they go home and get in line?
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  6. #49

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,400
    Thanks
    849
    Thanked 444 Times in 312 Posts
    to those who want to give them the path to citizenship:
    1. we need a law that clearly states that anyone born in this country to a non-american can not have automatic citizenship and those who have gotten it illegally (ie being born to people who were committing a crime by being here illegally) will lose citizenship and any benefits obtain.
    2. should an illegal be granted citizenship then they must repay the american taxpayers $250000 per year that they have been in this country illegally.
    3. all employment back taxes will be penalized with a 50% penalty
    4. all free medical they have received must be paid back
    5. they must be able to read and write english
    6. they must pledge their allegiance to this country
    7. they must prove they have never committed a crime in this country such dwi, driving without a license or insurance, theft, denounced this country etc
    8. they should have to have a sponsor (just like the people trying to escape the nazis) to be in this country who will monetarily pay for their needs so that the taxpayers never have to.
    9. they must be able to pass a physical just like the people coming thru ellis island had to.
    I'm sure I can think of a few more.........

  7. #50
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    Backlash grows over release of detained immigrants;
    GOP wants to know who gave final approval


    The Obama administration’s decision to release some immigrants awaiting deportation back into the community has spawned a furious backlash from Congress, where stunned lawmakers have besieged the Homeland Security Department with questions.

    Department officials have described the move as a cost-savings measure required by the budget sequesters, but two years ago one top official testified to Congress that detaining immigrants is usually cheaper than releasing them.

    As the questions build, so does pressure on Homeland Security Secretary Janet A. Napolitano, who has not yet answered the requests, signed by dozens of Senate and House members, to detail who exactly has been released, why they were being held in the first place, and who gave final approval.

    “It is frankly irresponsible that your agency chose releasing detained immigrants as its first effort to control spending,” a group of 37 House Republicans, led by Reps. Matt Salmon of Arizona and Duncan Hunter of California, said in a letter Friday.

    On Monday, Sen. Daniel Coats, the ranking Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee that oversees immigration, took to the Senate floor to say the department cannot duck his questions. He speculated that the release has already spurred a new wave of illegal immigration.

    “I can see the traffickers pitching this to tens or hundreds of thousands of people, taking their money, getting them across the border, breaching the fence or tunneling under the fence or climbing over the fence,” Mr. Coats said.

    An internal ICE memo obtained and released last week by the HouseJudiciary Committee found that the agency contemplated releasing 1,000 immigrants a week — far more than the several hundred it said it released.

    By the end of March, ICE would be detaining fewer than 26,000 immigrants, or 5,000 fewer than in mid-February. Congress has given ICE funding to detain about 34,000 on any given day, but the agency had been running at about 36,500 on the average day, meaning it was already over budget even before the sequesters.

    ICE has blamed both the sequesters and “fiscal uncertainty” stemming from the 2013 appropriations process for the cuts. Congress only passed funding for half of the year, and must approve the other half by March 27.

    Administration officials said that while they have released immigrants, they pose little danger to the community, and all of them are still being supervised, either through electronic device or by a check-in requirement.

    “These decisions were made on a case-by-case basis, by career law enforcement officials in the field, in order to ensure that ICE maintained sufficient resources to detain serious criminal offenders and other individuals who pose a significant threat to public safety through the end of the continuing resolution,” the agency said in a statement.

    Among the questions Mr. Hunter, Mr. Salmon and their colleagues are asking is how many immigrants were reviewed but denied release, what other budget cuts the agency made before deciding to do releases, and what sort of tracking is being used on those who were released.

    ICE has said it cannot divide out which immigrants were released because of budget constraints versus other reasons.

    But whether releasing immigrants saves money is now being called into question.

    Two years ago, ICE Director John Morton testified to Congress that it was often cheaper to detain immigrants than to release and monitor them.

    He said those who are released are usually lower-priority immigrants who don’t get deported as quickly, so they tend to stay in the system longer and therefore cost more in the long run. “It actually ends up being cheaper when people are in detention because they move much more quickly,” he said.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...#ixzz2NMHdxhE2
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  8. #51

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,400
    Thanks
    849
    Thanked 444 Times in 312 Posts
    If we use the same logic imposed by our government, then anyone (american citizen) with an illness that could cost money, an elderly person who is collecting ss and medicare, anyone on medicaid etc should be cast out of this country and left to wander at sea (or worse)..... unless they are in this country illegally. those who are here illegally will have the US government as their babysitters while they are set loose in this country. maybe they will have babies born here so then the government will not deport them...and perhaps reward them with citizenship, free college education, section 8 housing, food stamps etc.

  9. #52
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    On Wed. we posted the DHS testimony before Congress in which they said they did not yet have a "new measure" for border security. We said point blank that the Administration was PURPOSELY avoiding ANY measure for border security, because it would show the border was INSECURE, and doom the prospects for "immigration reform" (http://bit.ly/YZXQ2G).

    Media Matters attacked us, saying "anti-immigrant group Stand With Arizona smeared" Obama by making the charge. Well, now they better attack the New York Times as well, because today the NYT revealed the truth, just as we asserted:

    "Obama administration officials said on Thursday that they had resisted producing a single measure to assess the border because the president did not want any hurdles placed on the pathway to eventual citizenship for immigrants in the country illegally."
    *In other words, Obama is DELIBERATELY LYING about border security to push through amnesty.*
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  10. #53
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    DHS Tells a ‘Stunned’ Congress: We Still Can’t Measure Border Security

    By John Hill on March 20, 2013


    Uh, oh…looks like Janet Incompetanto’s disastrous management of DHS may threaten the passage of illegal alien amnesty that elites in both parties are determined to shove down our throats, by her utter failure to secure the border.

    DHS officials told Congress Wednesday they still “don’t have a way to effectively measure border security” — a revelation that lawmakers said could “doom the chances for passing an immigration legalization bill this year”. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...rder-security/

    Three years after the Obama administration scrapped the previous yardstick, which measured miles of the border under “operational control,” top Customs and Border Protection officials told Congress the new measure they’re working on won’t be ready for public use any time in the near future.
    It will never be “ready”. Here’s why: the entire reason DHS has been desperately trying to come up with some new, phony “metric” for border security, is so they could stop using the embarrassing ACTUAL metric called “operation control” that shows how grossly INsecure the border really is.

    For example, in 2010, the last time the figure was reported, a government audit found JUST 44 PERCENT of the border was under “operational control” – a figure then-House Judiciary committee chairman Lamar Smith rightly called “a failing grade”…

    That’s right, in 2010, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report finding the U.S.-Mexico border is vulnerable to cross-border illegal activity. http://judiciary.house.gov/news/GAO%...0Security.html Of the nearly 2,000 miles separating the U.S. and Mexico, only 129 miles are under “full control” of the Border Patrol. The report found that 873 miles are under “operational control,” which is only 44 percent of the entire Southern border. This report contradicts Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano’s recent remarks that the Administration’s “border security approach is working.”

    Big Sis just couldn’t let THAT stand. So DHS has spent the last 3 years trying to come up with a new way to spin their failure – and today revealed to a shocked Congress that they couldn’t: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...order-security

    When they scrapped the operational control yardstick, Homeland Security officials had said they’d have a new one ready in 2012. A year later, members of Congress said they’re still waiting.

    The revelation “stunned lawmakers on both sides of the aisle”, who said that without a way to measure border security, they “may not be able to convince voters to accept a new legalization”.

    “You do not want the Department of Homeland Security to be the stumbling block to comprehensive immigration reform for this country, and it could happen. So get in the game,” said Rep. Candice S. Miller, chairwoman of the House’s border security subcommittee.
    o hoo! The elites, along with their activist and media allies, and slave-labor addicted business lobbyists like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, have been one happy choir singing “The border is secure, the border is secure”, so they could fast-track the mother-of-all-amnesties. But to any even semi-rational mind, this was a ridiculous farce from the start. the border is nowhere near secure by any definition. And now the cat is out of the bag, and those same elites are not happy about it.

    Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, the ranking Democrat on the subcommittee, said she doesn’t think legalization should be held up over the issue, but said Homeland Security needs to do better.

    “You’ve got to get in the game,” she said. “What I’m hearing here is not really a definitive game strategy.”
    When you are losing even mindless sycophants like Sheila Jackson-Lee, you know you are in big trouble.

    http://standwitharizona.com/blog/201...rder-security/
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  11. #54
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    Officials Concede Failures on Gauging Border Security
    By JULIA PRESTON ~ Published: March 21, 2013

    More than two years after Homeland Security officials told Congress that they would produce new, more accurate standards to assess security at the nation’s borders, senior officials from the department acknowledged this week that they had not completed the new measurements and were not likely to in coming months, as the debate proceeds about overhauling the immigration system. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/refere...nyt-classifier

    Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers were taken aback at a hearing on Wednesday in the House of Representatives when Mark Borkowski, a senior Homeland Security official, said he had no progress to report on a broad measure of border conditions the department had been working on since 2010. The lawmakers warned that failure by the Obama administration to devise a reliable method of border evaluation could imperil passage of immigration legislation.

    “We do not want the Department of Homeland Security to be the stumbling block to comprehensive immigration reform for this country,” said Representative Candice Miller, a Republican from Michigan who is the chairwoman of the House Homeland Security subcommittee on border security. She told Mr. Borkowski that the lack of security measurements from the administration “could be a component of our failure to pass something I think is very important for our country.”

    Representative Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas, a Democrat and strong a supporter of President Obama’s immigration proposals, was more blunt. “I would say to the department, you’ve got to get in the game,” she said.

    Amid contentious discussions in Congress over immigration, one point of wide agreement is that an evaluation of border security will be a central piece of any comprehensive bill. A bipartisan group in the Senate is working to write legislation that includes a “trigger,” which would make the path to citizenship for more than 11 million illegal immigrants in the country contingent on measurable advances in security at the borders.

    Lawmakers have been pressing Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to devise a measure they can use to judge if the Obama administration’s claims of significant progress in border enforcement are justified. Republican senators in the bipartisan group have said a border standard is pivotal to their efforts.

    “We need to have a measurement,” Senator John McCain of Arizona insisted at a hearing in the Senate last week.

    “We need to assure the American people that we have effective control of the border and we have made advances to achieve that,” he said. “I need to have something to assure people they are not going to live in fear.”

    Obama administration officials said on Thursday that they had resisted producing a single measure to assess the border because the president did not want any hurdles placed on the pathway to eventual citizenship for immigrants in the country illegally.

    They also said security conditions could change very rapidly along the border depending on where smugglers tried to bring people and narcotics across, and where border agents were concentrating their technology and other resources.

    “While border security is complex and cannot be measured in a single metric,” said Peter Boogaard, a spokesman for the Homeland Security Department, “in every metric available to measure progress, we’re heading in the right direction, including decreased apprehensions and increased seizures.”

    Ms. Miller and Representative Michael McCaul of Texas, the Republican chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, have said they are preparing legislation that would compel administration officials to produce border measurements if they do not come forward with them in coming weeks.

    For several years before 2010, border officials used a measure known as operational control to describe the level of security along the southwest line. But in 2010, Ms. Napolitano said the department would drop that standard, arguing it did not reflect a substantial buildup of agents and detection technology in recent years, and it was insufficiently flexible to account for the varying terrain and fast-changing conditions along the nearly 2,000-mile southwest border, where most illegal crossings occur.

    In a recent interview, David V. Aguilar, the commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, said he had first proposed the concept of operational control years ago when he was the chief of the Border Patrol. He said it was meant to describe immediate conditions in limited patrol sectors, and he lamented that it had become the broadest measure of security advances across the entire border.

    “It was never meant to be applied that way,” Mr. Aguilar said.

    Since 2010, border officials have reported their results to the public mainly in terms of apprehensions they make of illegal crossers. Those figures have declined sharply across the southwest line, in what many experts agree is a sign of sharply reduced illegal flows. But border officials acknowledge that apprehensions alone are an imperfect indicator.

    So Mr. Borkowski, an assistant commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, and other officials have been working on what they have called the Border Condition Index. They advised Congress that it would assemble many different variables, including crime rates in cities and towns along the border, and daily flows of legitimate travelers and commerce through the ports of entry.

    Officials said the index would provide a broad, easily understandable view of enforcement at the border and the sense of security of Americans living near it.

    But as the immigration debate has gathered speed, even border analysts who praise the Obama administration’s enforcement efforts have grown frustrated with the Department of Homeland Security’s reluctance to produce data to assess them.

    “By every available measure, the border is far more secure today than it has ever been,” said Edward Alden, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations who specializes in immigration. “But D.H.S. does not have a reliable set of performance measures with respect to border security, and it has been utterly remiss in releasing data that would help Congress make a serious assessment.”

    At the hearing on Wednesday, Mr. Borkowski said the border index was still undergoing internal reviews, and he gave no time frame for when it would be ready. He also told Ms. Miller that the index would not be useful to assess border security as part of the negotiations over a comprehensive bill.

    Ms. Miller and other lawmakers were stunned. “I’ve been operating under the assumption for the last several years,” she said, that the index would be something that “anybody or any other agency vetting this would be using as a measurement.”

    Ms. Jackson Lee, the highest ranking Democrat on the subcommittee, blasted Mr. Borkowski for not offering a concrete standard. “You all have got to rise to the occasion,” she said.

    Michael J. Fisher, the chief of the Border Patrol, who also testified, sought to respond to the lawmakers, saying he would provide figures on numbers of illegal crossers who were caught more than once, and estimates of the percentages of those crossers who were detained and of those who got away.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/22/us...nted=all&_r=1&
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  12. #55

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,400
    Thanks
    849
    Thanked 444 Times in 312 Posts
    If those borders are so secure then why do people who have been deported show up again in this country?

    It seems that obama not wanting hurdles would be like telling kids that they can never go outside because they might bring dirt into the house. does he live in fantasy land? Makes me wonder if this administration thinks that benghazi is a hurdle that should be ignored too?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in