Say Anything Blog

So, the new mem of the “We are the world” crowd is that we shouldn’t make the effort ‘cause it won’t solve the problem.  Hmmm!

Isn’t that pretty much the same argument used by the same tiresome leftists in arguing against Reagan’s SDI idea?  It won’t work, so let’s not even bother to try or to do the research.  The results thus far of that visionary on-going research include the Patriot and Aegis anti-missle systems, the joint American-Israeli force field protection system noted here about a month ago, and who knows what other yet-to-be-announced “black” projects.  Funny, though.  I don’t recall hearing that very same it won’t work so let’s not bother trying type argument when the subject was funding for AIDS research, alternative fuels projects, or “global warming.”

In other words, liberals are both suspiciously selective in the reasoning they employ, and blatantly hypocritical in what they would, and would not, have us undertake as a national endeavor.

Close off the border!  It is the physical demarcation that separates our country from the rest of the world.  It is our sovereignty, our national identity, the physical outline of who and what we are.  Without a firm, indelible line of definition, there is no United States of America, And this world can ill afford the catastrophe of no USA.

Rob, the one thing you left out and I think you’d agree is that we need to empower local law enforcement (and all other government employees) to spot illegals and get them on the way to deportation.

So when an illegal gets a traffic stop, Deport him.

When the police respond to a domestic call of an illegal, deport them.

When an illegal checks themselves into an emergency room, deport them....

Leaving internal enforcement of our immigration laws to private employers is as hypocritical as it is bound to fail. 

Hypocritical?  The employer who may or may not know that the worker is legal or illegal is subject to the only penalty under this sceanerio.  The illegal has no problem moving on to the next possible job.

Also are we claiming that government employee’s are “too good” to enforce the law?

Bound to fail:  Do we think that all ILLEGAL immigrants will just go home if they can’t find a legitimate job?

Do all illegals work on the books?  (In fact I would bet, don’t know, that there are some businesses that are illegal owned and staffed.  Do you think they’ll go home)

Do you think that ALL illegals don’t particapate in crime?

There’s a certain progressive mindset that dictates that national boundries are a barrier to the spread of prosperity and freedom. There is some truth to this, but those who hold this view draw the wrong conclusion from it. Prosperity and freedom aren’t scarce resources that our national sovereignty monopolizes, or can monopolize. National borders and sovereignty work to preserve and keep states in the condition they are in: free and prosperous states tend to stay free and prosperous, corrupt and repressed states tend to stay in their sorry condition. If America throws open its borders and gives up its sovereignty--but nobody else does--we’ll be letting corruption in without sending prosperity out. As Bat1 said, America would cease to exist, and with it all the positives America has brought.

Once again, while you all think a big bad wall is the answer and deport 12 million people with 3 million citizen children, I continue to think this is unrealistic.  At some point a compromise will be struck and I don’t believe it will include those 12 million people leaving the country.  Some have been here for years, have homes, children and grand children some of whom are currently serving in our Armed Forces.  So we will simply deport these soldiers families, break up families that have been here for years. 

I continue to support a fine, required learning and proficiency in English back payment of taxes and then a path to citizenship.  They are here and 12 million and 3 million citizen children aren’t leaving.

Amnesty.

And then puzzlefeet? What? Let more in? Do you think it’s hard to secure the border, so we shouldn’t try?

puzzlefeet said, At some point a compromise will be struck and I don’t believe it will include those 12 million people leaving the country. Some have been here for years, have homes, children and grand children some of whom are currently serving in our Armed Forces.

Do you use the same argument for bank robbers who have managed to stay under the radar for a length of time? After all, some of them have homes, military service, children, and grand children. Should we punish a person who made an undocumented bank transaction ten years ago?

I continue to support a fine, required learning and proficiency in English back payment of taxes and then a path to citizenship.

Who cares about enforcing this nation’s laws?

I pay my taxes but there’s many folks that don’t pay in full.  Many of these people have children so they deserve amnesty. 

When can we expect amnesty for them? I’m interested because believe me as soon as amnesty is declared for tax cheats I’m joining that group.

How about amnesty for pot heads?  That one makes about a billion times more sense than for illegal aliens (but I’m still on balance against it.)

"Who cares about enforcing this nation’s laws?’

Likwidshoe,

Well said.  Onoe of the basic tenets that defines us as a nation is that we make the very laws that govern us, through our elected representatives, and that those laws apply, by universal assent, to all of us.

The notion of selective enforcement of our laws, or as Puzzle would have it selective unenforcement, undermines the very system that provides all those opportunities that the illegals come here for.

Get control of our borders!!  Withour our sovereignty, without an indelible national identity, we are nothing.

What, that “h” word again with liberals.  Don’t enforce our borders, but do enforce that act in time of war?  Enforce the law.  Take it to the Supreme Court if necessary.  Pass another constitutional amendment defining what most people with common sense already know.

Whistler, for your information many states including North Dakota have done tax amnesty programs.

I do favor securing the border just think that building a wall is not realistic. 

Hey, Lik, are you using this argument on our illustrious leader of this blog who continues to break the law and has admitted it?

I do favor securing the border just think that building a wall is not realistic.

Why? It’s relatively cheap and it works. It doesn’t keep out everybody, but then again nothing would.

Hey, Lik, are you using this argument on our illustrious leader of this blog who continues to break the law and has admitted it?

I don’t know what you are talking about. All I know is that when I break the law, I have to pay for it when and if I get caught.

Our elected officials are saying right now that they will not enforce the current law until we get a new law granting amnesty.  (Or something nearly identical with amnesty).

We need to see that they will enforce the law before we open up the floodgates.

Whistler, for your information many states including North Dakota have done tax amnesty programs.

Has the federal government?  Did the state grant amnesty for Tax Fraud?

Ah yup the fed did a tax amnesty program.

Whistler, the state did grant amnesty for failure to pay taxes.  They had to pay the tax but did not have to pay the interest or penalties and no criminal charges.

Oh and lik, you can look at Rob’s admitted crime here:  http://sayanythingblog.com/2006/05/19/missouri_town_close_to_evicting_unwed_cohabitating/

the state did grant amnesty for failure to pay taxes. They had to pay the tax but did not have to pay the interest or penalties and no criminal charges.

So you had to do the thing you should have done in the first place.

I think that this would involve illegal aliens going home and facing no penalties.

Interesting enough this get’s to the debate about whether or not we are giving out amnesty.  In this case we call it tax amnesty but they are required to do what they should have done in the first place.

Comments like “this alone won’t solve our problem” are inherently unconstructive, like the man facing divorce telling someone “but stopping my patronage of strip bars alone won’t solve my problem.”

To which the obvious answer is “true, but won’t it HELP?” In other words, the “this alone won’t help” crowd are in many ways fundamentally un-serious about finding solutions.

Robert:  You’re using logic again.  You know the other side gets upset when you do that.

Thanks--I’ll try to stop!  :^)

Oh and lik, you can look at Rob’s admitted crime here

Right.  Because co-habitating with my fiance in my home which I own is obviously just as bad as crossing an international border into a country without permission and then defrauding that country’s taxpayers by using up public services without yourself taking on the mantle of actually being a citizen.

Get real.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Mr. Perry,

Comments like “this alone won’t solve our problem” are inherently unconstructive, like the man facing divorce telling someone “but stopping my patronage of strip bars alone won’t solve my problem.”

This is what I wrote in the post:

I agree with the idea that border security alone is not going to solve our problems with illegal immigration. I don’t think that’s an argument against building fences and barricades along the border and increasing the manpower available from the border patrol, but unless we couple border security with some new approaches to illegal immigration within our borders not much is going to change.

I’m not arguing against border enforcement, I’m arguing against border enforcement as a solution all by itself.  Obviously, we have to do some things (such as consistently arresting illegal immigrants who are in the country) and avoid other things (like “path to citizenship” programs that reward illegals who are already here) altogether in order for this to work.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Well said, Rob.  What I was getting at is nothing to do with your ideas, but rather with the type of person who argues against a measure because “it won’t solve all of our problems.” Just noting that it’s an almost inherently false argument.

It’s interesting to see the call for “cracking down” on employers, but not “cracking down” on violating our borders in the first place, and then not “cracking down” on being here illegally, obtaining phony documents, lying on job applications, etc.  After all, the business owner may or may not know if a prospective employee is illegal, but the illegal always knows.  It’s never wrong to enforce our national borders.

No, Rob, that’s not what I’m saying. I happen to agree with you that it is an asinine law. But we have now agreed that the rule of law that is so important to most on this blog is not so important as it has been decided which rules are more enforceable than others. Rob, you used your judgment in which laws you want applied, and which you will not.  Which negates the argument of “our laws must be enforced”.  You’ve already decided that some are enforceable and some are not.

Well great, Puzzle.  I’m going to decide this weekend that DWI laws shouldn’t be enforced, bet blotto and then drive my SUV into your living room.

And I’d better your support in my decision not to follow the law.

/sarcasm

Honestly, is a little common sense too much to ask for?

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Rob, my point is that you have decided that certain laws are unenforceable like the one we both consider asinine.  And that the “rule of Law” also must have “common sense”.  Now that we have the ground rules decided, it is not common sense to remove 12 million people from this country or their 3 million citizen children.  We must have a “common sense” comprehensive approach to this issue.  it is not common sense to take away the homes and lives of these people who have been here for years.  It is not common sense to take away families who have children serving in our Armed forces.  It is not common sense to expect 12 million to leave an go back and stand in line to come in again.  It’s just not.

it is not common sense to remove 12 million people from this country or their 3 million citizen children. We must have a “common sense” comprehensive approach to this issue. it is not common sense to take away the homes and lives of these people who have been here for years. It is not common sense to take away families who have children serving in our Armed forces. It is not common sense to expect 12 million to leave an go back and stand in line to come in again. It’s just not.

It’s just not, because you don’t want it to be.

How about looking at it from my perspective: Is it common sense to reward 12 million people who have thumbed their noses at the immigration laws written and voted upon by our duly elected leaders?

Here I thought you’d have more respect for our democratic process than that.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Rob wrote: “How about looking at it from my perspective: Is it common sense to reward 12 million people who have thumbed their noses at the immigration laws written and voted upon by our duly elected leaders?

Here I thought you’d have more respect for our democratic process than that.”

Does it matter if one person (probably thousands living in sin in ND)has thumbed their nose at our laws or if 12 million have, Rob?

I do have respect for our laws, but we all have allowed this to happen and it will take a common sense comprehensive plan to get it under control.

I do have respect for our laws, but we all have allowed this to happen and it will take a common sense comprehensive plan to get it under control.

Why do we need a “comprehensive plan” to enforce the laws on the books today?  The threat is that the government won’t enforce the law unless…

Whistler; we need a plan because Congress never appropriated the money to enforce the laws.  What would you expect from a bunch of politicians?  :^)

It appears to me that our current rulers have there minds made up, open borders, now the link that I provided here is not some Liberal website, its a far right Conservative website, To me its the writing on the wall, think about it, and here is another Link to the new currency of the North American Union.

Amero
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=15017

And in case you missed the other Link to the North American Union, Here it is

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=14965

Its hard to refute this, It appears to be the New World Order to me.