|
24 Jul 06 - 01:05 AM (#1791322) Subject: BS: Amnestygate From: GUEST,Old Guy Now here is something that really disgusts me. Republicans, GWB included, want to make illegal aliens citizens of the US. Why? because they work cheap. Democrats want to make illegal aliens citizens too. Why? so they will vote for them. Which is the most disgusting? I say make businesses follow the law and fine the hell out of them for hiring illegal aliens. Some say this will put businesses in a law enforcement role. Bull crap. Schools have to make sure teachers are qualified, Hospitals have to make sure Docs and nurses are qualified. Is that law enforcement? If the illegals can't get a job, they have no reason to come here. They will have to emigrate legally to get work here. This will cause higher wages which will be a good thing, not a bad thing. So lettuce goes up a dollar. So it costs you more to get your yard mowed cause you are too lazy to do it your self. So what? People that make more, spend more and that boosts the economy. And another thing is the stingy ass Republicans that regularly vote themselves fat pay raises and have a completely different retirement plan and medical insurance plan from the people they "represent" and rob of their future SS retirement and Medicare benefits, should raise the minimum wage. They think it is a good thing that MacDonald's can hire people dirt cheap to flip burgers but how the hell do they support themselves? Government assistance and services that cost you and me more than the cheaper hamburgers. On the east coast, in restaurants, convenience stores, parking garages and so forth you see a lot central Europeans working. Someone arranges for them to come to the US and work legally. I don't mind that. They speak English, have good manners and try to fit in. Sometimes I give them lessons on how to pronounce words American style and they smile and try to learn. I am glad that they have the opportunity. I hope they spread good will about America back home. I do object when I see Latinos keeping apart and not trying to become Americans. America in a huge melting pot but they don't melt. The larger the Lation population gets, the less need thay have to blend in. Make them learn and speak English if they want to live here. In 1986, the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) was passed, creating for the first time penalties for employers who hired illegal immigrants. These penalties are very seldom enforced and forged documents are rampant leading to wide spread illegal immigrant employment. IRCA also contained an amnesty for about 3,000,000 illegal immigrants already in the United States, and mandated the intensification of some of the activities of the United States Border Patrol or INS. Because the immigration authorities do not detain any but a very small fraction of the approximate 1,000,000 illegals they catch but either sends them back or releases them on their own recognisance in the U.S. these border actions are very ineffective. By one account, the actual number of annual legal immigrants was estimated at 500,000 to 600,000 in 1989. This subsequently increased and is now well over 1 million annually, not including illegal migration or temporary work visas. The 1990 Immigration Act (IMMACT) -- Modified and expanded the 1965 act; it significantly increased the total immigration limit to 700,000 and increased visas by 40 percent. Family reunification was retained as the main immigration criteria with significant increases in employment-related immigration. Several pieces of legislation signed into law in 1996 marked a turn towards harsher policies for both legal and illegal immigrants. The Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) and Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) vastly increased the categories of criminal activity for which immigrants, including green card holders, can be deported and imposed mandatory detention for certain types of deportation cases. As a result, well over 1,000,000 individuals have been deported since 1996. |
|
24 Jul 06 - 01:11 AM (#1791324) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Peace "I do object when I see Latinos keeping apart and not trying to become Americans. America in a huge melting pot but they don't melt. The larger the Lation population gets, the less need thay have to blend in." So, we're all invited to your house for supper? |
|
24 Jul 06 - 01:34 AM (#1791330) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: GUEST Yes but it ain't Tacos. |
|
24 Jul 06 - 01:48 PM (#1791808) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Wolfgang It is fun to watch when right wing ideology and hate of different looking and acting people come into conflict with the daily needs of capitalism (cheap labour). Who is going to win? Ideology or profit? Wolfgang |
|
24 Jul 06 - 01:51 PM (#1791815) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Rapparee Workers of the World, Unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains! |
|
24 Jul 06 - 02:01 PM (#1791826) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: dianavan Profit is the name of the game, Wolfgang. That IS their ideology. Cheap labout (whether its slaves, sweat shops or illegal immigrants) is life blood of the American economy. |
|
24 Jul 06 - 05:10 PM (#1791976) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Bill D Trouble is, it is wrong to exploit cheap labor and discriminate against ethnic minorities AND it is wrong to cross borders illegally and put extra strain on local resources- (schools, health care, law enforcement,) Anyone wanting to actually live in a country should learn the language, pay taxes, and abide by the laws in place. |
|
24 Jul 06 - 05:56 PM (#1792017) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: dianavan I totally agree with that Bill. I know that there are detention centers in the U.S.A where they hold illegal immigrants (mostly Mexican). Maybe a middle ground would be to send those guys home and allow those that are already employed, to stay. Then, they can start 'beefing up" the immigration procedures to allow those with a family member in the U.S. to enter, with sponsorship. In the long run, both Canada and the U.S. should be providing those living along the Mexican border with aid to help them build a viable economy. If there were jobs in Mexico, illegal immigrants wouldn't be a problem. Seems to me its a Continental disgrace that the North should have a much higher standard of living than the South. As far as I can see, there is no reason, other than exploitation of labour, that Mexican's are so poor. I think this issue is just a 'red herring' to distract U.S. citizens by creating, yet another, division among them. The solution is mostly bureaucratic. It wouldn't be that hard to solve if there was any intention of ever solving it. |
|
24 Jul 06 - 06:52 PM (#1792060) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Bobert Hey, if the Republicans are so worried about illegal immagrants then let them pass legislation making it illegal to hire them... Hmmmmm? But they won't fo that because that would offend the employers who both hire them and make campaign contributions which have loopsidedly to the Republican Party fir the last 6 years... Duhhhh!!! Yeah, I don't hear Repubs cryin' about the health of the econoomy which is fueled by cheap and exploited loaborers but now the battle cry is the same ol' Republican song and dance routine: emotional issues that really don't mean much... (But, Bobert, these folks are takin' away jobs that good Americans would have...) Bull, they are doin' the crap that good ol' Americans can't afford to do for the wages that are being paid to do 'um... Bobert |
|
24 Jul 06 - 07:11 PM (#1792078) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Joe Offer Laws restricting immigration into the US are difficult to enforce, and they're difficult for Americans to support wholeheartedly. Most of our ancestors came here as immigrants, legally or illegally. In our heart of hearts, we know it isn't fair that it's legal for some people to immigrate here, and not for others. It's difficult to defend the morality of immigration restrictions, because there's an aspect of racism hidden just below the surface of the history of our immigration laws. -Joe- |
|
24 Jul 06 - 07:11 PM (#1792080) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Becca72 Dianavan, I think a big problem with that is that the Mexican government is blatantly corrupt. I say blatantly because they're out and proud about it, unlike our own government... |
|
24 Jul 06 - 07:48 PM (#1792114) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: GUEST, Ebbie "I know that there are detention centers in the U.S.A where they hold illegal immigrants (mostly Mexican)." dianavan I'm not aware of this. Would you please point me to a link? Thanks. As has been said many times, until we as a nation are not so conflicted about the issue it will not get resolved. As has been said many times, if companies and individuals found themselves facing a jail term and/or a hefty fine for being caught hiring illegal immigrants the cure would be quickly found. A friend of mine advocates that companies be forced to close each store when the company has been found guilty of illegal hiring - in fact, he goes further. He says that if Walmart, for instance, is found guilty of it the whole chain should face mandated closure for an agreed upon time. We've had the laws on the books for a long time. We should either abide by them or void them. All that said, I must admit that I'm in favor of immigration, illegal and not. I think the mix of cultures and races in the US has had an overwhelmingly beneficial effect. Further, I am not a Communist - mostly because I don't think it works - but manmade borders and other constructs to my mind are artificial divisions. |
|
24 Jul 06 - 10:02 PM (#1792207) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: GUEST,Art Thieme "Let's just stay right here 'til we outnumber 'em !!!" Woody Guthrie |
|
24 Jul 06 - 10:38 PM (#1792278) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Q (Frank Staplin) Joe, I agree with your comments. Until about 1920, immigrants were admitted as long as they could pay the fare and had no pestilent diseases (which included being black or oriental). Many of the immigrants whose descendants are whooping about illegals (a la simple Simon Lou Dobbs of the boggled mind) taking jobs away from legals faced the same problems- they took the 'jobs we don't want," but worked their way up (or their children did), and faced discrimination of the same kind. This flood of people eventually became good citizens (and it took more than one generation for many to learn the language). Spanish, I remind the insular people from the east, was the language of the southwest for many generations, along with several indigenous languages. Many of us don't belong to or care about the traditions of the 'pilgrims' and the New England settlers of old; traditions in the southwest were Spanish, introduced by settlers beginning in 1598, and are still kept by many citizens. As a schoolboy I worked briefly as a page in the New Mexico Legislature where legislators of Spanish ancestry often spoke in Spanish; a tradition now sadly lost as Anglos and English became dominant after WW2. My feelings are of welcome for our Latino cousins looking for a better life. |
|
24 Jul 06 - 11:26 PM (#1792309) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: dianavan Ebbie - I only know about it because my mom lives next to one of those facilities. From Wiki - " ICE operates detention centers throughout the United States that detain illegal immigrants who are apprehended and placed into removal proceedings. Kellog, Brown and Root (KBR), the engineering and construction subsidiary of Halliburton Corporation, released a press statement on January 24, 2006 that the company had been awarded a no-bid contingency contract from the Department of Homeland Security to support its Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities in the event of an emergency. The maximum total value of the contract is $385 million and consists of a 1-year base period with four 1-year options." |
|
24 Jul 06 - 11:49 PM (#1792318) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Joe Offer Click here for an article on Immigration Detention Centers. Ten years ago, for three weeks in the summer of 1996, I worked at the Immigration Detention Center in El Centro, California. My job was to update the security clearances of employees. At the time, Immigration Detention Centers were staffed primarily by government employees, and I tend to think that was a better situation. many of the INS facilities have been privatized - and my job with the Office of Personnel Management was privatized while I was in El Centro, which is why I retired three years later, at the age of 51. I couldn't stand it, and I felt I couldn't do a conscientious job. Ten years ago, most people in Immigration Detention Centers had been caught for some sort of violation and were awaiting hearings or processing. Most illegal aliens were just shipped immediately to Mexico, and there was no need for them to be in detention centers. Although I think our immigration policy is inhumane in many ways, I didn't see anything about the detention center that seemed particularly inhumane, but it certainly wasn't a "country club" atmosphere. -Joe Offer- |
|
25 Jul 06 - 11:35 PM (#1793310) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: GUEST,Old Guy Yes, immigrants are needed to do menial jobs but they should be legal. They should be paid a decent wage and the minimum wage should be raised to at least $10 per hour. There is no benefit in anything illegal. Enforce the law or change the law but enforce the law until it is changed. As it stands now the Mexican economy depends on the money these workers send back home. If you go to Walmart to send a moneygram, it is astually cheaper to send money to Mexico that to another Walmart in the US. |
|
25 Jul 06 - 11:43 PM (#1793315) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Ron Davies How do you propose to convince illegal immigrants to come out of the shadows without a path to citizenship? Would you? I wouldn't. |
|
26 Jul 06 - 12:11 AM (#1793332) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: GUEST,Old Guy Deny them jobs. Crack down on the employers. Let them go back to Mexico and persue legal immigration. If there is a shortage of workers, speed up legal immigration and increase quotas. Instead of passing a law that rewards them for breaking the law, Pass one that rewards them for following the law. You don't realize that the present situation creates an Almost slave state for illegal imigrants. The employers can screw them over all they want with out fear of violating regulations. What happens to their civil rights? They don't have any if they are illegal. Amnesty for the ones already here will not stem the flow of illegals. It will increase it because the new illegals will think they have a chance at amnesty too. |
|
26 Jul 06 - 12:48 AM (#1793346) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: GUEST "pass legislation making it illegal to hire them" Duhhh It is illegal to hire them. It was illegal under the Clintoon administration too but hell, he couldn't afford to piss off latinos any more that Bush or Carter. Can't get elected that way. You get a piss poor view of US and world events reading WAPO |
|
26 Jul 06 - 11:48 AM (#1793721) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Q (Frank Staplin) Most of the bigots who post on Mudcat do it as guests. Our 'visible" immigrant groups went through a "slave" and ghetto period, working in sweatshops, as domestics and in the sewers- Jews, Italians, Slavs and all the other 'huddled poor'. Now their descendants condemn the Latinos and West Indians who labor for us. And there is no way that the 10-20 million immigrants without proper papers can be removed. |
|
26 Jul 06 - 02:52 PM (#1793851) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: GUEST So Q wants to reward lawbreakers and benefit big business that hires them. It is too much trouble to enforce the law. If you listen to the legal immigrants, they are infuriated by the illegals. I guess they are biggoted. |
|
27 Jul 06 - 11:07 PM (#1795086) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: GUEST http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/tsowell/2006/ts_07261.shtml More Amnesty Fraud By Thomas Sowell July 26, 2006 Just when it looked like the Senate Republicans had finally gotten the message that the American people in general, and their own supporters in particular, are outraged over amnesty for illegal aliens, some Republican Senators have come up with yet another disguise for amnesty -- and gotten bipartisan support, including Ted Kennedy and John McCain. Under this new plan, its advocates claim, illegal immigrants would "have to leave the country" and re-apply to come back in legally and get on a path toward citizenship. It sounds good but on closer examination it turns out to be a fraud. How long would the illegal immigrants have to leave the country? According to the Senate bill they "may exit the United States and immediately re-enter." In other words, do a U-turn and come right back. How is that for "tough" border control? Nobody else gets into the United States that easily. You can say "tough" all you want and still be a wimp. Or a politician........ |
|
18 Sep 06 - 12:24 AM (#1837126) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Immigration bill a threat to economy By Phil Kent the Journal-Constitution 08/20/06 It is quite a legislative recipe when a few Senate Republicans craft policies favoring their business cronies and contributors addicted to cheap illegal labor. Then sprinkled in from liberal Democrats is language promoting an open borders and "multicultural diversity" agenda. The result? U.S. Senate Bill 2611, which creates a huge new guest worker/amnesty program that, in the estimate of the Heritage Foundation, imports 66 million aliens into our country over a 20-year period and puts them on the path to citizenship. [an error occurred while processing this directive] The bill is so expensive and harmful to our nation's economy and culture that one U.S. senator tells me the Senate GOP leadership is now too embarrassed to bring it before a conference committee to compromise with House —- passed legislation. The Senate legislation grants amnesty ("earned citizenship") to 12 million to 20 million people who have already sneaked across our borders —- and who will then receive all sorts of taxpayer-supported services. They are also allowed to bring in their families under an insane chain-migration policy. The 66 million estimate previously cited might even be low. Such a massive influx of unassimilated foreigners and their families means we will import poverty. The National Research Council reports that an immigrant to the United States without a high school diploma consumes $89,000 more in government services than he pays during his lifetime. The Center for Immigration Studies finds more than half of the illegals here are high school dropouts and have a 42 percent rate of out-of-wedlock births (and the babies get automatic U.S. citizenship). Any guest worker or amnesty program is liable to depress wages of the American laborer on a larger scale than has already been seen. The Washington Times reported more than 30,000 illegal aliens descended upon Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi after Hurricane Katrina. Naturally, contractors needed workers to clean up and rebuild. But the contractors were greedy and hired illegals. Illegal aliens are wage thieves. They steal jobs from unemployed Americans —- especially low-income whites, blacks and teenagers. One of the most outrageous features of Senate Bill 2611 —- aside from rewarding lawbreakers with services like college tuition breaks and eventual citizenship —- is requiring employers to pay foreign workers higher wages at construction jobs. The Davis-Bacon Act requires the local prevailing wage be paid to all workers in federally contracted construction projects. Those wages, up to four or five times higher in some construction fields than the federal minimum wage of $5.15 per hour, are set by the Labor Department. Senate Bill 2611 requires the higher wage be paid to temporary foreign workers in all construction occupations, even if the project isn't federally funded. This bill would supposedly protect American workers by ensuring that new immigrants would not take away jobs. However, the bill's definition of "United States worker" includes the "temporary" foreign guest workers, so the protection is meaningless. Senate Bill 2611 also creates an unnecessary F-4 visa category. It's essentially an automatic green card for any foreign student who earns a graduate degree in engineering or the physical sciences at a U.S. university. But as professor Norm Matloff at the University of California-Davis researched, there is absolutely no shortage of American master's and Ph.D. engineers. Again, foreigners will be poised to take jobs from Americans. Progress toward achieving sustainable yearly immigration levels can come by rejecting Senate Bill 2611, and by passing the "border enforcement only" House Bill 4437 —- which includes that badly needed fencing for portions of the Mexican border. |
|
18 Sep 06 - 12:39 AM (#1837133) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: dianavan Yes, but think of all those votes for good ol' George. |
|
18 Sep 06 - 01:21 PM (#1837532) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy I am totally against GWB on this one. I am independant and I am voting based on whether the candidate is for or against amnesty. |
|
19 Sep 06 - 12:33 AM (#1837979) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: dianavan Your vote against 12-20 million? Don't forget, this is a democracy. |
|
19 Sep 06 - 01:35 AM (#1838009) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Please define the question a little and I will gladly answer. What does "Your vote against 12-20 million" mean? |
|
19 Sep 06 - 02:07 AM (#1838021) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: GUEST America's being flooded with other-culture people just like the countries of Europe have been. It's part of the great breakdown of societies. When the western nations have been reduced to multi-linguistic chaos, they'll fall like ripe plums. In America, you have to take your citizenship test in English. That means you need to know English. Why, then, are ballots printed in anything other than English? |
|
19 Sep 06 - 03:05 AM (#1838030) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: dianavan Multi-linguistic chaos and other-culture people? Oh fear, oh fear. As if the English speaking mono-culture never creates anything but peace and harmony. Now thats what I call ignorant! |
|
19 Sep 06 - 07:48 PM (#1838717) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Bobert Hmmmmmm, Oldster, I see that you are quotin' the Heritage Council... Who started it??? |
|
19 Sep 06 - 08:36 PM (#1838728) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Bobert: I am not quoting anybody. That is my opinion. Bush is wrong on amnesty. The law should be enforced. I never heard of the Heritage Counsel. I still don't know what "Your vote against 12-20 million" means. |
|
19 Sep 06 - 11:35 PM (#1838798) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: GUEST Hey, I don't fear the coming multi-linguistic chaos. Fear grows out of the unknown, and I know exactly what's been foisted on America and the other great western nations. The global banking elite is always consolidating its power, and now, to go to the next level of consolidation, the western nations will be sacrificed. The bankers will survive and just take over the management of the new Latino/Asian slave class. So be it. The Latino/Asians will be much easier to control because they have no history of freedom. America's going to have to be torched, though. Too much freedom for too long. Buy guns. |
|
20 Sep 06 - 01:16 AM (#1838832) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: dianavan "Your vote against 12-20 million" means you're out-numbered by the very people you wish to keep out. Bush doesn't care if you vote for him. If he can give citizenship to that many illegal immigrants, who do you think they will vote for? Its a democracy isn't it? Bush is looking for votes and you don't count one way or another. |
|
20 Sep 06 - 02:00 PM (#1839336) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Amos Thank God, he can't use any more votes, real or imaginary. As for AmnestyGate, the notion of backfilling the definitions of crimes in order to protect Bush from having broken the laws in his heroic pursuits of warmongering is far more scandalous then the idea of amnestying people whose only crime was trying to get into a better life for themselves and families. A |
|
20 Sep 06 - 04:47 PM (#1839468) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Bobert Excuse me, Oldster, make that the Heritage "Foundation"... Now back to the question of who started it??? As fir the "12-20 million" thing... Taht's 'tween you and dianvan... B |
|
20 Sep 06 - 04:51 PM (#1839473) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: GUEST,number 6 "Thank God," Please don't ... been listening to much 'God' from 3 blithering fools at the UN in the last 2 days. sIx |
|
20 Sep 06 - 08:44 PM (#1839642) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: GUEST http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=72&ItemID=10957 A story about 73k Americans living in a concentration camp right now. |
|
20 Sep 06 - 09:11 PM (#1839661) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Bobert Yeah, don't go out an' provide the evidence that Bush and his cronies stole the 2000 election and expect to get away clean.... This ain't 'bout Katrina as much as it is about revenge... The Bush folks will have their revenge... You can take that to the bank... And fir you Bush-heads... Don't even begin to ar4gue that Bush won 2000 'cause it's like givin' a transfusion to a dead man... He lost it big time!!! If it weren't for spending 5 times tghe money on lawyers and havin' a Repub Supreme Court Bush would be cuttin' brush 365 days a year in Crawford... This ain't even close to bein' arguable... Oh, but the usual goose-steppin' knee-jerkers will come to Bush's defense like they always do... Bobert |
|
20 Sep 06 - 09:56 PM (#1839679) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Paranoid, lawbreaker supporting Bobert: I still never heard of them any heritage foundation. Dianavan: Yes. One person is definately out numbered by 12 to 20 million people. Now what has that got to do with amnesty for lawbreakers? I don't see your point. |
|
21 Sep 06 - 09:22 PM (#1840436) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Bobert You never heard of the Heritage Foundation, Old Guy??? I seriously doubt that.... It only happens to be the #1 rightie think tank and everything that comes from you has been put out by it... What, are you so brainwashed that you no longer know who is doing it??? Maybe a Google might jar yer danged "old guy" memory??? BTW, it was founded by former Nazi'z and Nazi sympathizers after WW II who were seriously courted by your Republican Party.... Yeah, check 'um out... All your arguments have come right (pun intended) outta the Heritage Foundation.... Don't think so??? Google 'um up a little harder.... Bobert |
|
21 Sep 06 - 09:51 PM (#1840454) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Bobert: Your assertion is false. I never heard of them. Why are you always on the side of the lawbreakers? Are you hiring illegal aliens? You must think I am a busy retired old guy working for the Bush admnistration, Walmart and the hertiage whatever. Did you ever stop to think that when somebody does not agree with you it is because that is the way they feel? Nope, It is always a plot by some evil organization. It sounds like paranoia to me. Time for a reality check. |
|
21 Sep 06 - 10:13 PM (#1840468) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Bobert No, Old Guy, I didn't since you seem to agree with Bush 99% of the time... That is what "true believers" do... Heck, I don't agree with anyone even 50% of the time... That is what free thinkers do... And for the record, about 99% of your opionions and positions are the exact opinions and positions of the Heritage Foundation... Hmmmmm??? You may think that you have sifted thru the vast amount of information to come to your conclusions but the more you talk the more apparent it is that you are so hung up in partisan politics that you are not capable of independent thought processes... Yeah, yer right about one thing... Time for a reality check... But, hey, I still likes ya' even if you are a brainwashed brownshirt so come on over here an' get a big hug... Bobert |
|
22 Sep 06 - 12:13 AM (#1840520) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Bobert: Ya gotta have a brain to be brain washed. And I don't have a single brown shirt regardless of your tired liberal clinches and rhetoric. Libs always have to assign everybody to one of their stereotypes, there is no such thing as a free thinker. That is why they can't think freely themselves. Oops, I just stereotyped somebody. Well I agree with Bush on somethings and not on others just like my wife, brothers etc. It is based on what I believe and not an ideology. I even agreed with Clinton on some things. I might even agree with you on some things but it looks like your mind is closed to any evidence that might make you change your mind. Is that called closed mindedness? Now you take these wetb.. err, illegal aliens. They are here illegally. You rant and rave when you think Bush broke the law but you want to bend the law for people that came here illegally. I don't blame them for coming. I am for them coming legally. I think they do the dirty jobs that Americans are to "good" to do and pay taxes, SS etc if they were paid a decent wage legally and more or less pay their way. Right now they are a drain on the state and local communities. A hidden tax that subsidizes the lower prices. But the present system is keeping them in a sort of slave state where they get treated like shit, under paid and they have no rights, pay no taxes and can't complain because they are illegal. That is because the Republicans want them here for cheap labor. It is also due to Democrats that want them here so they will vote Democratic someday. I think you will agree that it is crystal clear. Now the big problem with amnesty is that it gives them the idea that laws are not to be followed in the US. That they are a minority can get more benefits than Americans. They will not mix into the great American melting pot that made this country great. They will stay apart and be divided, not united with mainstream America. There will be gangs against other ethnic groups Ala West side story. It will be difficult in the short run to make these people tow the line and re inter legally. Quotas will need to be increased, processes speeded up and more INS personnel hired. I don't call that Gestapo tactics. I call that following the law. To give them amnesty will be easy in the short run but what are the long term consequences? We have already gone through the amnesty thing and it did not cure the problem. This amnesty will not cure the problem either. And we are going to spend 8 billion an a fence? Why not spend some bucks policing the businesses that hire them? I say crack down on businesses that hire illegal aliens. Make them follow the law. You are always bitching about the "Crooks" and they are crooks. If one lettuce grower hires illegals, the others have to do it to compete. If none of them can hire illegals they will all be in the same boat. That is fair. All businesses held to the same law. Also if the minimum wage was set at $10 it would be an incentive for them to enter legally to get that $10. It's probably 2 or 3 times what they are making now. It will be trickle up economics at work when the local economies improve. Now tell me what mold I was cast in? Tell me what organization I am loyal to? Tell me what doctrine I follow? |
|
22 Sep 06 - 04:19 PM (#1841054) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Bobert Actually, Old Guy, I haven't stated my opinion on the immigrant issue other than to point out that alot of folks who are so Hell bent on makin' it an issue right here at election time are the same people who have been benefactors of cheap labor... That's all I've said yet you want to put me into some kinda "liberal" trick bag and ***assume*** that I think this way or that way on the issue... The minimum wage issue stands on it's own and should not bea factor in the immigration debate... Bottom line, the minimum wage of today has lost 42% or it's purchasuing power since 1969 and that is just downright inexcusable no matter how you look at it... Bobert |
|
22 Sep 06 - 09:42 PM (#1841238) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: GUEST Eisenhower had the right idea. Operation Wetback. Round em up, kick em out. |
|
22 Sep 06 - 10:15 PM (#1841258) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Mr Objective rather than subjective thinking Bobert: Where did I state that you had stated your opinion? Where Did I say the minimum wage was needed only because of Illegal immigrants? I have stated in several threads it should be at least $10 The only thing I am saying about you is you use rhetoric and tired Liberal clichés like brownshirt instead of facts. You think it makes you seem much cooler to talk in symbolic phrases like "roll him under tha buss" than to speak plainly. It is facetious as opposed to being honest. What the hell does brownshirt mean anyway? Is it something from your glory days back in the 40s? And I still never heard of the Hertiage Foundation so you can repeat that all you like if it makes you feel better about your conflicted positions on things like crooks that hire Illegals are OK. But other crooks are the problem. You never explained who or what Boss Hogg is. Another example of your self serving rhetoric. Was he the fat guy on the Dukes of Hazard that had so much influence in his town? I think you were bragging about your own sphere of influence in your town. |
|
23 Sep 06 - 07:12 AM (#1841440) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Ron Davies OK Old- What's your view of building a fence between the US and Mexico--I believe the length is projected to be 700 miles. Is this a good idea? Yes or no? And why? |
|
23 Sep 06 - 07:16 AM (#1841441) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Ron Davies Also, given the fact that there are about 12 million illegal immigrants now working in the US, how many additional INS personnel do you think will need to be hired to remove them? And do you claim to be against Big Government? |
|
23 Sep 06 - 07:27 AM (#1841445) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Ron Davies And let me compliment you on the (singularly imaginative?) title of this thread. It fits your reputation for deep thinking. |
|
23 Sep 06 - 05:45 PM (#1841652) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Bobert Ahhhh, Old Guy, reread yer danged 12:13 popst and tell me that you weren't very strongly implying how I felt on the issue... The entire post is a rant against me for poasitions that you assdume I have taken... Reread it and get back on yer alzhiemer's meds... Geeze... Bobert |
|
23 Sep 06 - 06:03 PM (#1841666) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Nice to hear from such a good friend. I think instead of building a fence, we should spend the money on enforcing the laws against hiring illegals. Thake away their reason for coming here illegally and give them an incentive for coming here legally. Raise the minimum wage. Hire whatever INS people are necessary, I don't know how many it will take. Increase the quotas. Speed up the process. A fence is like a iron curtain. Not a symbol of freedom, justice and the American way. They will find away around, over, under or through it. Remember the coyotes get a good chunk of change for their services. As long as the laws are not being enforced there will be an incentive for them to smuggle people in. I see you are already whining about the title of this thread so no doubt you will be whining about my answer, accusing me of not answering your questions and refusing to answer mine. However that doesn't bother me a bit. It is sort of an homage to me and I like it. Noe here is a question for you just in case you decide to answer one for a change: Do you think the fence will cost less than what it will cost to inforce the existing laws plus whatever will be spent in admitting the 12 to 20 million illegals according to the present laws? |
|
23 Sep 06 - 07:07 PM (#1841689) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Bobert: I harrangued you for using those tired cliches like brownshirt. I don't know the meaning of that or Boss Hogg. Why not just state what ever you mean? You accuse me of following the agenda of something I have never heard of. I accuse you of reading the WAPO and that's where you get all of your opinions and talking points. The WAPO is your bible. Who owns it? What are their political connections and what are those connections leanings? |
|
23 Sep 06 - 07:44 PM (#1841704) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Bobert What's the WAPO, Old Guy??? But, hate to say it, but I agree with you about the fence and I agree with you about the hiring practices... What I don't understand is how illegal aliens get social security numbers but they do... Yeah, seems all it takes is some affidavit and a copy of a lease to prove they are here and somehow they get social security numbers??? Now that brings up another question... Hey, many of these folks are payin' into the Social Security system... Where does that money go if they are booted out??? Hmmmmmm??? No accusations here... Just a question/// My other question is in regards to folks who employ them and don't report their income... Hmmmmm???.. Like what kind of businessamn wants to have to use cash to pay someone under the table... At some point in time the "cash" variable becomes a tipping point where it's become cheaper to pay someone more than to use cash which can only be acquired legally from net income after taxes... In other words, if I'm an employer and hire a guy for $15 and hour off the street and don't report it, it really is costin' me closer to $20 an hour or earned income to cover that $15... LIke I say, there is a tipping point where folks will not be willing to use net income to hire folks off the street and under the table... At any rate, yeah, if we wanted to stop immigarnts it would be simple and wouldn't involve a fence... Just crack down on the employers... So, looks as if Old Guy and I agree on at least something... Law of averages done caught up with us... Danged!!! Bobert |
|
23 Sep 06 - 08:02 PM (#1841715) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy That is an acronym for the Washington Post. Like DHS and USA. Yeah we agree for a change. The SS payments are another reason for them to leave and return legally. I don't see how they can pay anything into the SS syatem if they are employed illegally and off the books. Maybe they are using fake or someone elses SS number. Yep, that damned fence is a boon to Halliburton and it will still cost a fortune to operate and mantain after it is built. It looks unamerican to me. Let'em in legally. That's what made america great. "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" |
|
23 Sep 06 - 08:09 PM (#1841720) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Bobert Boeing, not Halliburton, but who cares??? Can we agree that what we are seein' is renagade Repubs tryin' to find an issue to energize their base in an effort to hold power??? |
|
23 Sep 06 - 10:15 PM (#1841775) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: GUEST Old Guy - Make up your mind. First you complain, "...want to make illegal aliens, citizens of the US." Then you say, " Let'em in legally." Make up your mind. |
|
23 Sep 06 - 11:46 PM (#1841791) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Amnesty involves the forgiving of a crime. That is what I am against. It tells them that the laws in the US do not have to be followed. They should be deported or made to leave and allowed to enter legally following the proceedurs under the law. |
|
24 Sep 06 - 09:14 AM (#1841986) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Bobert So, let me see if I have this right, Old Guy??? You are suggesting taking 11 million workers, most who are not only paying tax but paying into the Social Security system, off their jobs??? Do you have a clue what that would do to the US economy??? You might want to revist that part of yer program from a less emotional and more pragmatic state of mind.... Bobert |
|
24 Sep 06 - 10:25 AM (#1842024) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Bobert: How do illegal aliens pay taxes? |
|
24 Sep 06 - 01:01 PM (#1842141) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Ron Davies That's right, Old, homage to you-spelled N-E-E-D-L-I-N-G you. And it's so much fun. You always rise to the bait. I'm just pointing out your wonderful reading skills--the perfect compliment to your logic. Now, back to the issue: OK, no fence--of any length?--make it clear. Yes or no? Assuming that the answer is no, on to my next questions, which you somehow did not find time to answer. How many INS agents will it take to remove all 12 million of the illegal immigrants now working in the US? And do you claim to be against Big Government-yes or no? |
|
24 Sep 06 - 02:30 PM (#1842210) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Bobert Well, yeah, Old Guy, they do... The Repubs have made such a big deal over the word "illegal" when it comes to Hispanics... Many of these so-called "illegals" have been here for years, work, pay taxes, have kids who were born here and in school... Sorry to burst yer bubble but thems is the facts... I know... I hired two of them myself before I retired and both are still here and working, paying taxes, etc... Bobert |
|
24 Sep 06 - 10:10 PM (#1842543) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Bobert: I asked you how, not if. RD you got all the answers and you never answer any of mine. Suppose you dazzle us with your brillinace. Meanwhile I am basking in the limelight. |
|
25 Sep 06 - 12:26 AM (#1842604) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: GUEST Kicking all illegals out of the U.S. would be a boom to the U.S. economy. The illegals are job thieves. Kick them out so their employers would have to hire legal Americans, and those wages would suddenly be coursing through the AMERICAN economy, instead of being mailed home to other countries. Kick out the criminal illegals and make employers hire either natural-born or naturalized Americans. |
|
25 Sep 06 - 09:20 AM (#1842824) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Guest: You are right. The illegals are keeping wages down for legal citizens that pay taxes. However there would still be a shortage of labor for low end jobs. If the illegals were made to follow the law, they would pay taxes and make more money that would course through the American economy. Raising the Minimum wage would also cause more money to course through the American economy and give the illegals a reason to become citizens legally. The basic question here is do we reward the illegals for breaking the law or do we reward them for following the law? There are crybabies like RD who focus on anything negative they can find as an excuse to do it the easy way and excuse lawlessness. This has been done before and it did not work. |
|
25 Sep 06 - 10:02 AM (#1842857) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Woman Dragged To Death In Colorado Jose Luis Rubi-Nava, 36, of Glendale, Colo., was arrested on a charge of first-degree murder and was being held without bail in the Douglas County jail, Sheriff Dave Weaver said. [The Rocky Mountain News reported September 21 that Denver police stopped Rubi-Nava on April 21 because the license plates on the car he was driving "came up on a national database as associated with a wanted party." Officers arrested Rubi-Nava after noticing that the Mexican identification card he presented appeared to be forged. The News reported that, according to the Denver Sheriff's Department, Rubi-Nava spent the night of April 21 "in jail" and that he "was charged April 22 with providing false identification, driving without a valid license and having no proof of insurance. He was "released on his own recognizance after being charged, and all three charges were dismissed April 27. Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesman Carl Rusnok said agents believe Rubi-Nava is an illegal immigrant from Mexico. Rubi-Nava had worked at a Burger King and was employed at a landscaping company in Arapahoe County. Rubi-Nava has three sons and a wife in Mexico. The woman that was dragged to death, Luz Maria Franco Fierro, his girl friend that he lived with, has three daughters and a son in Mexico.] Rubi-Nava, who was arrested Tuesday night, was the man pictured in a photograph found near the woman's body when she was discovered. Weaver did not say whether a woman who also appeared in the photo had been identified. An autopsy report released late Tuesday revealed that the victim was alive when the killer or killers placed a rope around her neck and dragged her behind a vehicle. The coroner said she died from blunt force injuries and strangulation. The woman's mangled, naked body was discovered along Surrey Drive near the Surrey Ridge subdivision, about 20 miles south of Denver, at about 2:39 a.m. Monday, police said. Police said she was dragged in the normally quiet subdivision for more than a mile. The woman was found dead with an orange tow rope wrapped around her neck. Police said a winding drag mark, consisting of tire marks and blood, stretched from Interstate 25 exit 191 to the area in the road where the woman's body was found, Denver TV station KMGH reported. Her face was so disfigured that she could not be identified, police said. Her body was found in a massive pool of blood in the middle of the street. There was so much blood spilled on the concrete that street sweepers could not remove it all and authorities had to hire a private contractor to take care of it. Police said at least one witness reported seeing a vehicle driving with its lights off, dragging something the night the woman was killed. |
|
25 Sep 06 - 12:46 PM (#1842972) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Bobert So??? Are you trying to say that we shoud be afraid of Hispanics because of this incident, Old Guy??? Hmmmmm??? If so, then by all means, round every last one up and boot 'um out.... Right??? You know, you and GUEST here seem have some really strange concepts about the way problems are solved... Very niave', too, I might add... Come up with a better plan that isn't so friggin' radical in nature... Bobert |
|
25 Sep 06 - 10:15 PM (#1843345) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Bobert: Since when is enforcing the law radical? |
|
25 Sep 06 - 11:38 PM (#1843396) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: GUEST Exactly. Enforce the law. We have millions of criminal illegals in this country, and many are aggressively claiming the country as their own. Some of their leaders are saying they should kill people of another race. End it. Kick 'em out. And there won't be any low-wage jobs to fill afterwards, or not for long, because the wages will go up for those jobs until they suddenly become desirable to citizens. Supply and demand. This isn't rocket science, it's arithmetic. |
|
27 Sep 06 - 02:31 PM (#1844291) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Joe Offer I think we should grant dual US-Mexican citizenship to all Mexican citizens living or working in parts of the US that used to be part of Mexico. Seems fair, doesn't it? -Joe- |
|
27 Sep 06 - 05:46 PM (#1844494) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy That would really stop them from emntering illegaly wouldn't it? We went through this before and it did not work. Why would it work this time? Also the US paid Mexico $15 million to for territory. |
|
27 Sep 06 - 06:35 PM (#1844540) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Bobert That territory included most of Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and Southern California... Not to mention Polk'as War against the Mexican people... Hmmmmmmm? Them Mexican made out like bandits, didn't they, Oldster??? |
|
28 Sep 06 - 11:58 AM (#1845112) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy I got to thinking that Joe might be right. My mind does not slam shut like some others I know. Then I got to thinking how did Spain get to own the territory? They killed off the Indians, exploited them, enslaved them, stole all of their riches etc. Mexico got the territory after they fought a war of independance with Spain. America got the territory after it fought a war with Mexico and paid Mexico $15 million. And what happened after it became an American territory? Were the indigenous people sent to Mexico or where ever they came from or were did they become citizens? How about that Joe? |
|
28 Sep 06 - 01:39 PM (#1845212) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Joe Offer Well, Old Guy, there are a number of upper-class Mexicans who are more-or-less "pure-blooded" descendants of the Spanish conquistadores. The majority of Mexicans are descendants of intermarried Spanish and indigenous ancestors. And, especially in some provinces, there are large populations of people who are mostly indigenous. It's the indigenous people who emigrate to the United States to find work. OK, so maybe Mexico should pay back the $15 million, and then the US should allow unlimited access and forget about building the silly fence. -Joe Offer- |
|
28 Sep 06 - 07:56 PM (#1845556) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Bobert The fences are nothin' more than my tax dollars being used to play to the right winged political base of the Republican Party and I resent the heck out of it... These crooks make Slick Willie look like a Boy Scout when it comes to stickin' their hands in my pocket to prop up their power hold... Tell ya all what... There was a time when I juast paid my taxes and, even when it hu8rt, I didn't make much effort to avoid (not evade) paying my tyaxes but I'm in in big time avoidence mode with these crooks... I hate paying taxes to such a power hungry and corrupt administration and I'm wearin' my tax accountant out with ways I've come up with to not give these crooks any more than I ***have*** to give them... Just today, I came up with a way to keep $750 bucks a year from going to these thugs... Hey, if they want a friggin' fence so that angry white NASCAR dads will vote foer them, then fine... Take it out of the RNC budget!!! Grrrrrrrrrr!!!! Mad Bobert |
|
28 Sep 06 - 10:45 PM (#1845631) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Unlimited access how? according to the imigration laws? I am all for that. And for changing the immigration laws to speed up the process you know, like they did at Ellis Island. In America I think most of us have some indigenous blood. I do. I think I am about 1/100th Pocahontas. I don't really matter. Look at what America did to the place. It is in such good shape they all want to come. It it had stayed in the hands of Mexico it would probably be soo poor the Mexicans would be sneaking into Canada. |
|
28 Sep 06 - 11:38 PM (#1845660) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Ron Davies Old- You were going to tell us how many INS agents it would take to remove the 12 million illegal immigrants now here. And what else you would do to remove them. I'll clue you--they won't come forward voluntarily--and employers will not turn them in---why should they?--they're happy with the jobs they do. Also if you claimed to be against BIg Government or not. Seems to have slipped your mind. Also you seem to be hemming and hawing on the fence-- (no pun intended--perish the thought)-- build a fence between the US and Mexico or not? |
|
28 Sep 06 - 11:56 PM (#1845665) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Illegal Immigrants' Cost to Government Studied By Mary Fitzgerald Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, August 26, 2004; Page A21 A report that found that illegal immigrants in the United States cost the federal government more than $10 billion a year -- a sum it estimated would almost triple if they were given amnesty -- has drawn criticism from immigration advocacy groups. For its report, the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington-based group that advocates tougher immigration policies, used Census Bureau figures to compare the revenue that illegal immigrants contribute through taxes with the cost of government services they use. Illegal immigrants create a fiscal deficit because they have low incomes, Steven A. Camarota said. (Robert A. Reede - Robert A. Reeder -- The Washington Post) Friday's Question: It was not until the early 20th century that the Senate enacted rules allowing members to end filibusters and unlimited debate. How many votes were required to invoke cloture when the Senate first adopted the rule in 1917? 51 60 64 67 _____Special Report_____ • Census 2000 _____Free E-mail Newsletters_____ • Politics News & Analysis • Campaign Report • Federal Insider • News Alert "Households headed by illegal aliens imposed more than $26.3 billion in costs on the federal government in 2002 and paid only $16 billion in taxes, creating a net fiscal deficit of $10.4 billion, or $2,700 per illegal household," said Steven A. Camarota, author of the study. The costs outlined in the report include government services such as Medicaid, medical treatment for the uninsured, food assistance programs, the federal prison and court systems, and federal aid to schools. The study acknowledged that, on average, the costs that illegal-immigrant households bear on the federal government are less than half that of other households, and that many of those costs relate to their U.S.-born children. It also pointed out that tax payments by illegal-immigrant households constitute one-fourth those of other households because of low-income jobs. "With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services," Camarota said. The report estimates that granting legal status to illegal immigrants would dramatically increase their cost, causing the net fiscal deficit to rise to nearly $29 billion because, the author argues, unskilled immigrants would have access to more government services while continuing to make modest tax payments. Camarota concluded in his report that the fiscal impact could be lessened only by stringently enforcing immigration laws, a view that drew criticism from some immigration specialists and advocacy groups that also accused him of not coming up with constructive recommendations. "Implied within this study's findings is the sense that if these people could suddenly be made to disappear, the federal government would be $10 billion to the plus, and that is almost certainly not true once you look at the numbers," Jeffrey S. Passel, a demographer at the Urban Institute, said in an interview. "Should you charge up to undocumented aliens the cost of small-business loans that they don't get or the cost of civil litigation, among other things? This report does that," he said. Frank Sharry, director of the National Immigration Forum, an immigrant advocacy group, took issue with the report's treatment of illegal immigrants' U.S.-born children, who are American citizens. "The costs of the children of immigrants are accounted for [in the report], but not their contributions to the economy as workers and taxpayers," he said in a written statement, adding that the report's conclusions were not helpful to the debate on immigration reform. "There is a growing consensus in both political parties that our immigration system needs to be comprehensively reformed," Sharry said. "Our current system of haphazard laws, spotty enforcement, border chaos and unfair restrictions needs to be replaced by a regulatory regime that makes immigration safe, legal and orderly." |
|
29 Sep 06 - 12:06 AM (#1845669) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy RD: Previously I have answered questions of your and you refuse to answer mine. Instead you run away to another thread like Dianavan and start whining about something else. Subject: RE: BS: Has Walmart been defeated? From: Old Guy - PM Date: 23 Sep 06 - 06:56 PM 1. Yes 2. No, none of the other companies were required to do anything under the Walmart Bill. that's why they called it the Walmart bill. 3. Yes 4. Yes 5. Yes, other companies with less than 10,000 employees and Walmart could have afforded to spend 8% of its payroll in Maryland towards health care for its own employees or put the difference into the Maryland state Medicaid fund but for whatever reasons, they did not do so. In West Virginia Asplundh, which is the next biggest employer under Walmart, has 13.2% of its employees with children participating in the plan, 146. McDonalds, which is the next biggest employer under Asplundh, has about 8.5%, 100. Respite Care, which is the next biggest employer under McDonalds, has only a few less employees with children participating in the plan than than McDonalds, 97 vs 100 for McDonalds. The USPS, which is the next biggest employer under Respite Care, has only a few less employees with children participating in the plan than Respite Care. 94 vs 97 for Respite Care. Walmart has 3.9% of it's employees with children participating in the plan, 452 vs 437 Why is Walmart targeted and not the others? Why is the employee threshold set at 100 in other states? Now who is the forgetful one? |
|
02 Oct 06 - 10:13 AM (#1848241) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy Hey Mr "Hugo is da' man" Bobert: I just found out what a brownshirt is: The Left-Wing Fascist (sic)? The National Guard or state police force in Venezuela has been accused of intimidation and bullying tactics of opposition, reminiscent of the Mussolini brownshirts in the 1930's. It is also troubling that nationalism and xenophobia are seemingly fostered by the government, combined with a push to have the population loyal to Chávez and not to the country. He has created a cult of personality about himself, creating the illusion to the masses that he is infallible; as a speaker Chávez has a bombastic style, literally working his audience up into a frenzy. Like Mussolini? |
|
02 Oct 06 - 12:28 PM (#1848392) Subject: RE: BS: Amnestygate From: Old Guy The Price of Dissent in Venezuela ...Col. Chávez, who did everything--including granting citizenship to half a million illegal aliens in a crude vote-buying scheme and "migrating" existing voters away from their local election office--to fix the results in his favor. One opposition leader was moved to a voting center in a city seven hours away. Another man, Miguel Romero, had for years voted in his neighborhood school in a Caracas suburb. But this time the Electoral Council computer indicated that he was to vote at the Venezuelan Embassy in Stockholm. Thousands of others, like me, were wiped from the voting rolls. Ironically, in the runup to the vote, the embassy in Stockholm, like Venezuelan diplomatic posts around the world, inexplicably ran out of passports. Many Venezuelan expatriates were thus prevented from returning to their country to vote... |
