Ariz. governor signs immigration enforcement bill

[quote name='depascal22']You want a solution?

1. Legalize marijuana. Hit the cartels where it really hurts. In the wallet.

2. Streamline the immigration process. This will put more people into the system and allow more taxes to be collected. It will also remove the biggest excuse for illegals that the system is built against them.

3. Prosecute business that hire illegals to the fullest extent of the law. Illegals can't hire themselves. We wouldn't have millions of people here if they were just mowing lawns and watching kids.

[/QUOTE]

i agree with all 3 of those. but you gotta deport the illegal workers too after busting their bosses.

also add

4. Take away birthright, only a child of a citizen should be a citizen.
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']i agree with all 3 of those. but you gotta deport the illegal workers too after busting their bosses.

also add

4. Take away birthright, only a child of a citizen should be a citizen.[/QUOTE]

Why not just hand them the paperwork for citizenship and give them a few weeks to fill it out? You just put them out of a job. Give them a chance to make things right. After all, they're showing more initiative than many Americans that sit on government assistance.

As for #4, why the venom about birthright? Is it so bad to give these kids a decent education, access to public services, and the right to vote? If you want to make arbitrary rules based on other countries' policies, then why not make citizenship conditional on military service or public service? I'd be all for that.

What makes you think you earned your right to be a citizen over someone else that was born here of non-citizen blood? What have you personally done to defend our liberties?

EDIT -- That wasn't directed only at you RAM. I direct that anyone that believes that citizenship should only be reserved for children of other citizens.

I think the assumption is that citizens will "train" or educate their children in the ways of the government but it's a simple fact that the majority of our countrymen have no idea how this country really works. They've had every advantage of citizenship and could care less.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='depascal22']

Also, why does everyone assume that marijuana use automatically leads to harder drugs? I know many people that are perfectly happy with marijuana, alcohol, and tobacco. I think cartels would lose far more money in marijuana sales than they would gain in heroin or cocaine sales. I guess it's easy to demonize things you have no idea about. Or maybe you heard of a guy that knows a guy that's strung out on drugs. Rumor is he smoked grass once.

[/QUOTE]

The two bold parts are my favorite parts.
 
[quote name='depascal22']

Also, why does everyone assume that marijuana use automatically leads to harder drugs? I know many people that are perfectly happy with marijuana, alcohol, and tobacco. I think cartels would lose far more money in marijuana sales than they would gain in heroin or cocaine sales. I guess it's easy to demonize things you have no idea about. Or maybe you heard of a guy that knows a guy that's strung out on drugs. Rumor is he smoked grass once.

[/QUOTE]

The two bold parts are my favorite parts.

Also did I say that marijuana automatically leads to harder drugs? nope, did I say a percentage of new marijuana users will move on to harder drugs? yup
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']i agree with all 3 of those. but you gotta deport the illegal workers too after busting their bosses.

also add

4. Take away birthright, only a child of a citizen should be a citizen.[/QUOTE]

Talk to the SCOTUS on that one, they've made it clear that 'anchor babies' (teabagger terms, not mine) are citizens, and the parents can't be deported.

Of course, knowing how the current SCOTUS works, any and all precedent that has been set is fair game.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Why not just hand them the paperwork for citizenship and give them a few weeks to fill it out? You just put them out of a job. Give them a chance to make things right. After all, they're showing more initiative than many Americans that sit on government assistance.

As for #4, why the venom about birthright? Is it so bad to give these kids a decent education, access to public services, and the right to vote? If you want to make arbitrary rules based on other countries' policies, then why not make citizenship conditional on military service or public service? I'd be all for that.

What makes you think you earned your right to be a citizen over someone else that was born here of non-citizen blood? What have you personally done to defend our liberties?

EDIT -- That wasn't directed only at you RAM. I direct that anyone that believes that citizenship should only be reserved for children of other citizens.

I think the assumption is that citizens will "train" or educate their children in the ways of the government but it's a simple fact that the majority of our countrymen have no idea how this country really works. They've had every advantage of citizenship and could care less.[/QUOTE]

You have to kidding about giving children of illegal parents citizenship and the right to programs funded by middle class. The 13th amendment was set up for slaves so they are recognized as citizens after the civil war. I would say if a pregnant women comes to the country and gives birth to a child that child automatically becomes a citizen based on jus soli.

That has been a part of the illegal immigration problem. Also the fact that policemen who are actually doing their job stopping illegal drug runners are being prosecuted for doing their job.

So yes, the 13th ammendment should be changed to children of US Nationals and US Green Card holders.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Why not just hand them the paperwork for citizenship and give them a few weeks to fill it out? You just put them out of a job. Give them a chance to make things right. After all, they're showing more initiative than many Americans that sit on government assistance.

As for #4, why the venom about birthright? Is it so bad to give these kids a decent education, access to public services, and the right to vote? If you want to make arbitrary rules based on other countries' policies, then why not make citizenship conditional on military service or public service? I'd be all for that.

What makes you think you earned your right to be a citizen over someone else that was born here of non-citizen blood? What have you personally done to defend our liberties?

EDIT -- That wasn't directed only at you RAM. I direct that anyone that believes that citizenship should only be reserved for children of other citizens.

I think the assumption is that citizens will "train" or educate their children in the ways of the government but it's a simple fact that the majority of our countrymen have no idea how this country really works. They've had every advantage of citizenship and could care less.[/QUOTE]

i believe theres a number of proposals that would allow current immigrants a change to "move to the front of the line" to becoming legal immigrants and/or citizens. i wouldnt necessarily oppose that depending on how its implemented.

the problem with birthright is the children are getting all the perks that you mentioned, education, public services, voting etc, but their parents arent putting into the system.

what have i done? nothing other than being a tax paying citizen that was the child of tax paying citzens who were the children of tax paying citizens. i signed up for the draft and thats that. but i wouldnt mind some type of requirement to be a full fledged citizen, whether it be through military or public service. other countries do it, i certainly dont think it would hurt us.


[quote name='IRHari']Talk to the SCOTUS on that one, they've made it clear that 'anchor babies' (teabagger terms, not mine) are citizens, and the parents can't be deported.

Of course, knowing how the current SCOTUS works, any and all precedent that has been set is fair game.[/QUOTE]

the SCOTUS ruled on that what, over 100 years ago. immigration has changed drastically since the 19th century. it should be revisited.

[quote name='aosora13']You have to kidding about giving children of illegal parents citizenship and the right to programs funded by middle class. The 13th amendment was set up for slaves so they are recognized as citizens after the civil war. I would say if a pregnant women comes to the country and gives birth to a child that child automatically becomes a citizen based on jus soli.

That has been a part of the illegal immigration problem. Also the fact that policemen who are actually doing their job stopping illegal drug runners are being prosecuted for doing their job.

So yes, the 13th ammendment should be changed to children of US Nationals and US Green Card holders.[/QUOTE]

14th amendment...
 
The birthright thing I think should be demonstrated to actually be causing some problems before it's thrown out. A child born a US citizen to illegal immigrant parents doesn't keep the parents or the child (with the parents) from being deported, so if the problem is that they're not paying taxes (which of course they would be paying if they're in the country, besides income taxes perhaps, which they probably also wouldn't be paying much of if they were citizens, considering they're probably not making all that much money), it doesn't have to do with the child being a US citizen as much as them all not having been deported for being illegal immigrants yet. If the kid is in the country and not in the care of illegal immigrants then they're either on their own or in the care of somebody who's probably paying taxes.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Why not just hand them the paperwork for citizenship and give them a few weeks to fill it out? You just put them out of a job. Give them a chance to make things right. After all, they're showing more initiative than many Americans that sit on government assistance.[/QUOTE]

Wait - two parties break the law and you want to severely punish one of them and reward the other one?

[quote name='depascal22']I think it's funny that every one of the border states except for New Mexico has been controlled by Republican governors and they haven't done a damn thing to stop this problem. I've lived in border states for most of my life and it's funny that people that don't live near the border are the most concerned about illegals.[/QUOTE]

I think it's funny that people who don't live near the Middle East all have opinions on Israel and Palestine.

But to answer the first part of your query - that's easy - look at the backlash that's happened in Arizona when the governor has tried to "stop this problem". Instead of actually discussing the issue, we get half-witted politicians boycotting the state (except when they need something from the state) because Arizona doesn't share a border with Mexico. You get the president of Mexico coming in, telling us how to run our country when he can't even take care of his own shithole. You get the president of our country going around to other countries talking about how he's going to sue you. It is any surprise it's taken this long for someone to stand up and attempt a solution?
 
I could give two shits about Israel and Palestine at the moment. We've got way bigger fish to fry on this side of the pond.

Also, Why the fuck do you care what Calderon says? You don't even give a shit what our own President says.

Also, anchor babies will eventually pay taxes. They will get jobs and pay into the system. So why not let them get on the right foot. Would you rather have them be ignorant and more prone to crime?

Bob, why don't you start a brand new company (since you seem to be so obsessed about your fictional company that discriminates against everyone but poor whites) that actively searches for illegal anchor babies and forcibly removes them from the country. Stop with the rhetoric and start taking action, man. I'm tired of you armchair conservatives that are just pissed off at the world because you work at fucking Wal Mart.
 
A) I haven't said one word about "anchor babies".
B) I'll start that company when you start your company that steals all the money from the evil rich people and gives it back to us poor working folks. And it has to be a company, you can't become a part of the government and continue what they're already doing.
C) I find it insulting that a man who can't even run his own country is invited here to speak crap about our country and is entertained and fed via taxpayer dollars. If the SOB wants to improve life for Mexicans, let him do it in Mexico where they elected him to do it.
 
Dude, it's called fucking diplomacy. The worst of the worst get invited here and we all pretend it will really change something.

And just because I responded to one thing you said doesn't mean my entire post was directed at you. Don't pretend like anchor babies haven't been a key part of this entire discussion, dude.

Also, I did start a business that siphoned money from corporations to my pockets. It was a headhunting firm that made several thousand dollars finding employees that businesses were too lazy to find. Times were good until corporations stopped hiring. Now, I'm working for the man until we can get back up and running again.

So what do you have next? Some crazy story about how the liberals are ruining your country again? Some other grandiose home based business that should be able to shoot coloreds on sight? Do you have anything other than Flat Earth, conservative bullshit?
 
[quote name='depascal22']And just because I responded to one thing you said doesn't mean my entire post was directed at you. Don't pretend like anchor babies haven't been a key part of this entire discussion, dude.[/QUOTE]

Bob, why don't you start a brand new company [...] that actively searches for illegal anchor babies and forcibly removes them from the country. Stop with the rhetoric and start taking action, man.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I can see how your rant about anchor babies was in no way directed toward me. Must have been that other Bob around here. Damnit, where'd he go now?
 
Excuse me, I should've said your future make believe business will round up all illegals and ship them cattle style to the Mexican desert aka the border.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Excuse me, I should've said your future make believe business will round up all illegals and ship them cattle style to the Mexican desert aka the border.[/QUOTE]

Ah, well, see, that makes a lot more sense. I mean, I totally see how you mistyped "round up all illegals and ship them cattle style to the Mexican desert" as "anchor babies". I mean, those letters on the keyboard are so close.
 
So we're playing the semantics game now are we?

How about this? Start whatever business you want. Doesn't matter. I'll give you six months to do something about all the problems you have such a hard problem with. Do something other than bitch after your shift.
 
[quote name='depascal22']So we're playing the semantics game now are we?[/QUOTE]

I'll be honest, I have no idea what kind of game you think you're playing aside from "Pin the crap on the other guy."

You seem to have a lot of practice at it.

How about this? Start whatever business you want. Doesn't matter. I'll give you six months to do something about all the problems you have such a hard problem with. Do something other than bitch after your shift.
Click to expand...

Says the guy working for "the man". Why aren't you out there making a difference? Posting on CAG doesn't help your fellow man get health care and all that jazz.
 
Pin what crap? I choose to demonize businesses that knowingly hire illegals instead of demonizing the guy that just wants to feed his kids? Shit. No problems there.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Pin what crap? I choose to demonize businesses that knowingly hire illegals instead of demonizing the guy that just wants to feed his kids? Shit. No problems there.[/QUOTE]

Crap like:
[quote name='depascal22']Oh Bob, quit pretending you'll be nice to all those wetbacks when you open your hypothetical home based business. Nice only applies to white men in your world.[/quote]

Besides, if you're okay with someone working illegally in order to feed his kids, then why be so harsh on the guy paying the guy who's working illegally to feed his kids? It takes two to tango - If two parties knowingly enter into an illegal contract, it's bad form to punish one and reward the other. Let's take the opposite idea. I don't support this, but let's go with it. If a company hires an illegal worker, we'll deport the worker and liquidate/confiscate all of his assets and we'll give the company "job stimulus" funding so they can afford to hire legal workers.

See, it's bullcrap to pick winners and losers this way.
 
No. It's bullcrap to pretend that illegals enter into any sort of contract with anybody over here.

Illegals wouldn't be over here in such great numbers if there weren't a ridiculous number of businesses that are willing to look the other way in the name of the all mighty bottom line.

Do illegals come over here and force businesses at gunpoint to hire them? I'm confused where the reciprocity is with a guy that makes less than minimum wage, works a ridiculous amount of hours, and has little to no recourse if he gets hurt at work.

What you and other conservatives fail to realize is that this country is so great that these people would literally walk across a desert, swim across the Rio Grande, and/or get stuffed with six other dudes into the truck of a '72 Buick just for a chance at a shitty job here. They work hard and try to make a living for themselves. We're acting like spoiled rich kids at the country club. Oh sorry, we got here 100 years ago on a boat and had to do next to nothing to qualify but you can't do that. Sorry. Membership is closed and we have the right to associate with whom we want.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Do illegals come over here and force businesses at gunpoint to hire them?[/QUOTE]

Did we start up the slave trade again? I didn't know businesses were sending people to Mexico, forcing people to illegally immigrate to the US and work for them. We should make a law against that.
 
Don't pretend that immigration wouldn't be severely curtailed if word got out that jobs dried up.

Illegals come here for money (and thus a better life) plain and simple. They won't come here if there's no money. Problem is, you have to convince businesses to stop hiring them. We should make a law against that.

Take big business (and lazy Americans that hire people to cut their grass) out of the picture and you're left with the violent criminals that should be dealt with accordingly.
 
[quote name='depascal22']And you're a retard. [/quote]
Your most logical immigration argument so far. Thanks.

I think it's funny that every one of the border states except for New Mexico has been controlled by Republican governors and they haven't done a damn thing to stop this problem.
Click to expand...
This demonstrates your fundamental lack of understanding the basics of the immigration problem with that paragraph.

Borders and immigration are, and always have been, a Federal issue. Have you already forgotten that the entire reason AZ's new law has the Fed pissed off is primarily because AZ has decided to do the Fed's job? The Government doesn't like people doing it's job, especially when they have purposefully decided not to do it.

Let's pretend for a minute that immigration and border control is NOT a Federal duty. What, exactly, do you propose a border state do to immediately and swiftly stop unlawful entry through the border? Which method would make you feel good and get the job done at the same time?

I've lived in border states for most of my life and it's funny that people that don't live near the border are the most concerned about illegals.
Click to expand...
Another silly assumption. You are basically saying that illegals mostly stay in border states. You don't leave your state much do you?

I don't know which state you live in but every border state I know of, with the exception of California, is highly concerned about it - and right behind AZ in "doing something about it". Oh wait - I forgot - Those states don't understand the immigration problem. They haven't stopped to have compassion and open their hearts..... They are just mad because they are full of conservative racists.

As for solutions, do conservatives have anything except for the ineffectual wall? Please give us something other than immigrants are the devil and should be rounded up like vermin.
Click to expand...
Another solid demonstration of your complete lack of understanding of most conservative views - but that's wildly known as your M.O. Get the talking points from Rachael Maddow and go trolling....

How about we start with doing what nearly every other country in the world does, and what we have done in several other countries to "secure" them? Here is a hint - it involves the presence of people in funny green uniforms all along the border. Hell, we have tens of thousands of them playing Xbox's on foreign bases, I'm sure we can spare a few to play Xbox in our own desert, No? Let me guess - that would send the wrong message and hurt feelings across the border? If that is your next argument, then argue against this: Why would it be wrong to simply imitate Mexico's southern Border? See, the Mexican's actually understand borders and control the ones they want exceedingly well. Maybe we should hire them as advisors for ours?


Also, why does everyone assume that marijuana use automatically leads to harder drugs? I know many people that are perfectly happy with marijuana, alcohol, and tobacco. I think cartels would lose far more money in marijuana sales than they would gain in heroin or cocaine sales. I guess it's easy to demonize things you have no idea about. Or maybe you heard of a guy that knows a guy that's strung out on drugs. Rumor is he smoked grass once.

And wanting to legalize it doesn't mean we can't tax the shit out of it. I support heavy taxes on legal marijuana. It's a win win. People don't have to buy off the street and the government can regulate and profit from the trade that goes on anyway.
Click to expand...

I never said anything about Marijuana. I don't give a shit about Marijuana. Stop the stream of humans across the border and you solve many other problems. For the most part I agree with legalizing Marijuana, but you are fooling yourself to think doing so will somehow decrease border crime.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Don't pretend that immigration wouldn't be severely curtailed if word got out that jobs dried up.

Illegals come here for money plain and simple. They won't come here if there's no money. Problem is, you have to convince businesses to stop hiring them. We should make a law against that.[/QUOTE]

I completely agree.

I simply disagree that after we bust a business for hiring illegal workers that we should then reward the illegal workers. Two people broke the law in this equation.
 
Thrust, you could put 100,000 troops on the border and people will still find a way. Stop businesses from hiring people and it will be more effective.

And dude, Rachel Maddow? I haven't watched MSNBC in months but I guess that gets you off so OK. I love Rachel Maddow. I secretly dream of turning her straight.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Thrust, you could put 100,000 troops on the border and people will still find a way. Stop businesses from hiring people and it will be more effective.[/QUOTE]

Can't we do both?
 
[quote name='depascal22']Thrust, you could put 100,000 troops on the border and people will still find a way. Stop businesses from hiring people and it will be more effective.
[/QUOTE]

Bingo. Doing both is clearly the best plan I've heard so far.

You're right. 100,000 troops won't stop every single one. Neither will less jobs. But both together is likely the only solution that will show results.
 
So we're in agreement. Now, the public option and we can be done with this CAG legislative session and we can go bang some CAG lobbyists. Oh wait, we dont' have any. I gotta get elected.
 
REPORTER: Thanks, Robert. First I’m going to put aside what you said about being a Dallas fan. I’m just going to pretend that didn't happen. (Laughter.) On another more important topic, one thing as you have mentioned several times today, the President directed Justice to look at the Arizona law because he doesn’t want a patchwork of state and local laws. But right now there are dozens of so-called sanctuary cities that have their own policies that might potentially conflict with federal law, something that's led Governor Brewer to say that if Arizona is in violation of federal law, then so are these localities. So my question is, why did the President only ask DOJ to look at Arizona and not everywhere?


MR. GIBBS: Yes, well, let me see if I can get -- I don't know the answer to that, but I will try to seek some answer on that.
Click to expand...

seems like a perfectly reasonable question. the thought hadnt even crossed my mind on this lawsuit effecting sanctuary cities, my guess is most people didnt think about it.
 
I'm glad the reporter asked that question, as it's been the forefront of my mind lately as well.

It's a massive double standard. You can't go after someone for messing with your authority if you don't go after others for doing the same thing. The only difference being that you happen to find the method in the latter group uses to be more politically expedient to you.
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']seems like a perfectly reasonable question. the thought hadnt even crossed my mind on this lawsuit effecting sanctuary cities, my guess is most people didnt think about it.[/QUOTE]

Perfectly reasonable answer from Gibbs as well. Or, at least, the best answer we're likely to get.

On a side note - I do wonder if there's any way for Arizona state government to counter-sue the Federal government for failing to provide proper enforcement of Federal laws.

Similar to the California thing, it'd be interesting if every Arizona citizen that has ever been harmed (and I mean actually harmed, not the 'they took our jobs' people) by an illegal immigrant would file a lawsuit against the Federal Government...
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Perfectly reasonable answer from Gibbs as well. Or, at least, the best answer we're likely to get.

On a side note - I do wonder if there's any way for Arizona state government to counter-sue the Federal government for failing to provide proper enforcement of Federal laws.

Similar to the California thing, it'd be interesting if every Arizona citizen that has ever been harmed (and I mean actually harmed, not the 'they took our jobs' people) by an illegal immigrant would file a lawsuit against the Federal Government...[/QUOTE]

That is a good question, should the federal government have to pay $20 million to the texan that got killed by an illegal immigrant because they didn't enforce the law that is on the books?

Otherwise the Gibbs question was a good one, I would like to hear an answer to that, they deny that their immigration policies are politically motivated(we all know thats BS), and yet they are taking action against Arizona for not falling in line with their policy, but ignoring the santuary cities that are breaking the federal law completely.
 
still no response from gibbs or the white house. i wonder if theyre actually workers on a statement or position. maybe theyre just hoping it blows over.
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']still no response from gibbs or the white house. i wonder if theyre actually workers on a statement or position. maybe theyre just hoping it blows over.[/QUOTE]

meh, they wont explain because the simple explanation is that they agree with the sanctuary city policy, and they disagree with the Arizona one. They couldn't care less about the federal law unless it is a means to getting rid of something they disagree with (the Arizona law). However much they deny it, the whole thing is politicized up the ass and they want to have their cake and eat it too.
 
[quote name='Strell']I'll remember your nonchalant attitude about how totally legal Murricans are somehow such better citizens than illegals when more fallout from this appears. [/QUOTE]

Ok if we prosecute the people who broke the law by stealing or handing out, private information, stalking, etc will you be okay with prosecuting the illegal aliens who are breaking the law?

Nope you wont because breaking that one law isnt as bad as breaking the other law! har har har. In strells mind identity theft wouldnt be charged because murder is so much worse, and the person stealing indentities is just trying to get by!
 
Wait - It couldn't have been a government official of any kind that leaked this information. Y'all made it perfectly clear to me how safe it was to trust random government officials with all your personal information. Obviously, whomever created and leaked this list did so with absolutely no access to any kind of government data base.

I will lol so hard if it turns out this is somehow tied to the Census.
 
[quote name='Strell']Hey everyone - let's play CHANGE THE TOPIC, the hottest game sweeping across American right now.[/QUOTE]

I completely agree.

Discussing a leak of private personal data in Utah is completely off topic in a discussion about Arizona immigration law.
 
I forgot where I said "let's change the whole topic." It was probably around the time you started thinking I was posting that directly at you.

But hey - with how bad your analogies are, I'm surprised you were able to differentiate two totally different states. That's impressive, Mr. Magoo.

Besides, it has been proclaimed - on a number of occasions - in this very thread that simply by being an illegal, they are somehow godless heathen terrorists shitbags hellbent on ruining our perfect Christian country. So what I bring to the table is entirely related, and far more juicy than whatever bullshit you're shopping around.
 
[quote name='Knoell']That is a good question, should the federal government have to pay $20 million to the texan that got killed by an illegal immigrant because they didn't enforce the law that is on the books?
[/QUOTE]

Sadly, no because you can't point to the liable party. It's sort of ridiculous. I wish I could remember the SCOTUS on this since I know "citation needed" is present here, but one cannot sue the Fed Gov based on their culpability of not having stricter border patrol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top