May 1st Planned City Shutdowns...

[tawn]

Date: 5/10/2006 11:42:38 AM
Author: AGBF

The New Colossus

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
''Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!'' cries she
With silent lips. ''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.''

EMMA LAZARUS​

The point is that they''re not coming in through the "golden door"!

 

[AGBF]

Date: 5/10/2006 1:05:28 PM
The point is that they''re not coming in through the ''golden door''!

Exactly. We slammed shut the golden door. It''s time to reopen it and get back to being the nation that accepts immigrants...which is what all of us are.

 

[LAJennifer]

Date: 5/10/2006 1:37:57 PM
Author: AGBF




It''s time to reopen it and get back to being the nation that accepts immigrants...which is what all of us are.

We do. About 1 million per year.

 

[sunkist]

Date: 5/10/2006 1:37:57 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 5/10/2006 1:05:28 PM

The point is that they're not coming in through the 'golden door'!

Exactly. We slammed shut the golden door. It's time to reopen it and get back to being the nation that accepts immigrants...which is what all of us are.

Tawn is exactly right. Our doors are wide open, we have a system for people to be allowed to walk through them. The problem comes when people are "storming the castle" and jumping over walls and having no respect for us at all. I feel that we have respect for all immigrants who wish to come here. Heck! We're bending over backwards for these illegals, and this is wrong. Perhaps our "respect" has been skewed, and now we're getting screwed. Anyways, the golden door is NOT slammed shut. How can you think it is? Don't you know anyone who has recently legally immigrated here? I do. It happens!

 

[AGBF]

Date: 5/10/2006 4:06:58 PM
Author: sunkist
Tawn is exactly right. Our doors are wide open, we have a system for people to be allowed to walk through them. The problem comes when people are ''storming the castle'' and jumping over walls and having no respect for us at all. I feel that we have respect for all immigrants who wish to come here. Heck! We''re bending over backwards for these illegals, and this is wrong. Perhaps our ''respect'' has been skewed, and now we''re getting screwed. Anyways, the golden door is NOT slammed shut. How can you think it is? Don''t you know anyone who has recently legally immigrated here? I do. It happens!

Our current immigration policy is NOT the policy we had in the mid-nineteenth century. The door is closed to many to whom it would once have been open.

I am not going to discuss illegal aliens. I am sticking to immigration policy. It is my position that if we stood by our values, there would be no illegal aliens, only hardworking immigrants like my great-grandparents and, perhaps, some people turned away for health reasons.

 

[ForteKitty]

It takes me 30 minutes to get home from work each day. I live 3 miles away. A 2 bed/1 bath, 1000 sq. ft home is over half a Millilon dollars, and people are fighting over them. What do you think will happen when they start letting everyone in, without some kind of control?

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 5/10/2006 1:37:57 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 5/10/2006 1:05:28 PM
The point is that they're not coming in through the 'golden door'!

Exactly. We slammed shut the golden door. It's time to reopen it and get back to being the nation that accepts immigrants...which is what all of us are.

yes....only the LEGAL ones.

it pisses me off when they try to come in through the back door

 

[sunkist]

Date: 5/10/2006 4:34:09 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 5/10/2006 4:06:58 PM

Author: sunkist

Tawn is exactly right. Our doors are wide open, we have a system for people to be allowed to walk through them. The problem comes when people are ''storming the castle'' and jumping over walls and having no respect for us at all. I feel that we have respect for all immigrants who wish to come here. Heck! We''re bending over backwards for these illegals, and this is wrong. Perhaps our ''respect'' has been skewed, and now we''re getting screwed. Anyways, the golden door is NOT slammed shut. How can you think it is? Don''t you know anyone who has recently legally immigrated here? I do. It happens!

Our current immigration policy is NOT the policy we had in the mid-nineteenth century. The door is closed to many to whom it would once have been open.


I am not going to discuss illegal aliens. I am sticking to immigration policy. It is my position that if we stood by our values, there would be no illegal aliens, only hardworking immigrants like my great-grandparents and, perhaps, some people turned away for health reasons.

But immigration policy is NOT the problem! That''s what illegals and their supporters are saying, that''s what they want you to believe. But really they just want to walk in here not paying for anything and have us pay for everything. Yes they want to work and that is honorable. But how can we stand by our values and say there are no illegal aliens? We have laws. If we take down those laws, or pardon consequences of breaking those laws, or ammend them to satisfy the people who don''t agree with them and want to break them, then that is when we are lowering our values! You said you want us to stand by our values, but that cannot happen if we give in and lower our values and standards.

I''m sure your great-grandparents were hardworking immigrants. My great-great-grandparents were too! I don''t want to dishonor the America that they left for us by allowing illegals to drain us fanancially and changing the rules to please people who don''t want to follow them.

 

[fire&ice]

My mother was first generation. Her parents came through Ellis Island. They were here legally as the majority of our ancestors were.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 5/10/2006 8:46:37 PM
Author: sunkist
But immigration policy is NOT the problem!

It is not the problem in your opinion. It is the issue I am addressing, however, so obviously it is of importance to me.

Date: 5/10/2006 8:46:37 PM
Author: sunkist
That's what illegals and their supporters are saying, that's what they want you to believe. But really they just want to walk in here not paying for anything and have us pay for everything.

I have not addressed the issue of illegal aliens except insofar as to say that if the laws were changed, many good people wouldn't need to be illegal in order to be here and work.

I do not understand what you mean by, "they just want to walk in here not paying for anything and have us pay for everything".

What on earth do you think they would get by being allowed to reside here legally...except the right to work hard and be part of a democratic society? Why would we have to "pay for" that? In my opinion, immigrants can enrich "us".

 

[LAJennifer]

Date: 5/10/2006 11:42:38 AM
Author: AGBF

The New Colossus

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
'Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!' cries she
With silent lips. '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.'

EMMA LAZARUS​

And for those who ARE coming through the golden door, here are some statistics taken from the Office of Immigration Statistics (OIS) for 2005:

Total number of persons achieving Legal Permanent Resident (LPR) Status in 2005 - 1,122,373.
66% Were already living in the US.
58% gained permanent status by a family relationship with an LPR.

Leading country of birth was Mexico, by 14%.
Second place went to India, with 8%.
China comes in third, with 6%.
Rounding out the top 5 were the Phillippines at 5%, and Cuba with 3%.

Top five states of destination:
1) California - 21%
2) New York - 12%
3) Florida - 11%
4) Texas - 8.5%
5) New Jersey - 5%

The historical trend shows a steady increase since World War II - the golden door doesn't look shut to me.

 

[sunkist]

Date: 5/11/2006 1:08:16 PM
Author: LAJennifer

The historical trend shows a steady increase since World War II - the golden door doesn''t look shut to me.

Exactly!

 

[colormyworld]

Here we sit in our climate controled houses with well paying jobs, plenty of food to eat, and we talk junk because the freeway is crowed. Can any of you nay sayers consider for a moment what kind of world these people are trying to get away from. So they can make a better life for themselevs.

 

[tawn]

Date: 5/11/2006 5:06:13 PM
Author: colormyworld
Here we sit in our climate controled houses with well paying jobs, plenty of food to eat, and we talk junk because the freeway is crowed. Can any of you nay sayers consider for a moment what kind of world these people are trying to get away from. So they can make a better life for themselevs.

The quest for a better life shouldn''t begin by breaking the law!

Why should the people who enter illegally be treated better than the people who have entered properly and lawfully?

 

[AGBF]

Date: 5/11/2006 6:13:50 PM
Author: tawn
Why should the people who enter illegally be treated better than the people who have entered properly and lawfully?

They shouldn''t. The law should be changed to embrace more people fleeing political repression by our friends, not just our enemies (like Cuba). It should be changed to embrace more people fleeing economic hardship, too.

BTW, Canada has a policy by which it encourages immigration to certain, underpopulated areas.

 

[colormyworld]

tawn do you really believe that the people sneaking here from Mexico have it better then you? I am sure you would jump at the chance to be out harvesting crops or doing unskilled labor for less than minimum wage in the summer heat. If you think thier life is so great, grab a shovel and start digging ditchs.

 

[tawn]

Date: 5/11/2006 6:26:35 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 5/11/2006 6:13:50 PM
Author: tawn
Why should the people who enter illegally be treated better than the people who have entered properly and lawfully?

They shouldn''t. The law should be changed to embrace more people fleeing political repression by our friends, not just our enemies (like Cuba). It should be changed to embrace more people fleeing economic hardship, too.

BTW, Canada has a policy by which it encourages immigration to certain, underpopulated areas.

I agree that Immigration needs a major overhaul, but disagreeing with the current law doesn''t give a person the right to break it!

I happen to live in the part of the country that has the majority of illegal immigrants, and I see many issues firsthand every single day! It have to say that it bothers me when I see a guy protesting holding up his "F**k the USA" sign, and then see the same guy hanging out with 20 others in front of Home Depot looking for an illegal day job!

Ironically, Canada received record Immigration inquires (from American) after Bush was sworn in for a second term!

 

[AGBF]

Date: 5/11/2006 6:54:11 PM
Author: tawn
Ironically, Canada received record Immigration inquires (from American) after Bush was sworn in for a second term!

Why do you feel that is ironic? Is it impossible for you to conceive of people preferring Canada to the United States under Bush?

 

[tawn]

Date: 5/11/2006 6:34:27 PM
Author: colormyworld
tawn do you really believe that the people sneaking here from Mexico have it better then you? I am sure you would jump at the chance to be out harvesting crops or doing unskilled labor for less than minimum wage in the summer heat. If you think thier life is so great, grab a shovel and start digging ditchs.

I''d appreciate it if you wouldn''t jump to conclusions about me and my life! This is supposed to be a civilized constructive discusion regarding illegal immigration and the issues surrounding that, and I personally would like to keep on topic.

This is what I said in the post that I''m assuming you''re responding to: "The quest for a better life shouldn''t begin by breaking the law! Why should the people who enter illegally be treated better than the people who have entered properly and lawfully?"

What I meant since I apparently didn''t make myself clear: People who enter the country illegally should not get to "budge" in front of the people who came here the legal way in order to receive legal status in this country!

 

[tawn]

Date: 5/11/2006 7:09:46 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 5/11/2006 6:54:11 PM
Author: tawn
Ironically, Canada received record Immigration inquires (from American) after Bush was sworn in for a second term!

Why do you feel that is ironic? Is it impossible for you to conceive of people preferring Canada to the United States under Bush?

No, I found it ironic because people are trying so darn hard to get into America, yet the Americans were trying to get to into Canada! Seemed a little amusing to me...

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 5/11/2006 6:26:35 PM
Author: AGBF

They shouldn''t. The law should be changed to embrace more people fleeing political repression by our friends, not just our enemies (like Cuba). It should be changed to embrace more people fleeing economic hardship, too.

BTW, Canada has a policy by which it encourages immigration to certain, underpopulated areas.

what are we going to do with the 2.5 billion people comming over from Africa, China and Mexico.

the poorest nations are always over populated.

 

[colormyworld]

I assumed nothing about your life. I responded to your post were you said the illegals had it better than those here legally.

 

[tawn]

Date: 5/11/2006 8:07:39 PM
Author: colormyworld
I assumed nothing about your life. I responded to your post were you said the illegals had it better than those here legally.

Read the post again please. I''m pretty darn sure that I did not state that illegals had it better than those here legally...but interpretation is everything isn''t it!

I''ll go out and dig my ditch now...

 

[tawn]

News story from today...

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican and Democratic Senate leaders agreed on Thursday on a plan to revive a bill that would give millions of illegal immigrants a chance to earn U.S. citizenship.

The sweeping immigration overhaul, which has triggered rallies by millions of immigrants and their supporters across the country, is expected to be considered by the Senate next week.

Despite the agreement between Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, the outcome of the legislation remains in doubt. It faces opposition from some Republicans who say it gives amnesty to people who broke U.S. laws.

Frist said opponents will be allowed to offer "a considerable number of amendments" to the bill. In return, Democrats won assurance that the bill''s backers will have input in eventual negotiations with the U.S. House of Representatives.

The House passed a tough border security bill that would further criminalize illegal presence in the United States and the two bills will have to be merged.

The House bill, which would make illegal presence a felony instead of a civil offense, has drawn huge protests around the country from Hispanic groups and their supporters.

Pro-immigrant groups plan to hold a demonstration in Washington on May 17 to protest the House bill and support broad reform being considered by the Senate. The rally is being organized by some of the same groups involved in the nationwide May 1 demonstrations in support of immigrant rights.

Frist said he wants the Senate to finish work on the bill by the end of the month, when Congress takes a weeklong break for the Memorial Day holiday.

The legislation stalled just before Congress'' Easter break in April when Democrats, worried that Republican opponents would try to gut the bill, blocked consideration of amendments and sought to limit their number. Even though some of those amendments now will go forward, backers feel they have the votes to defeat them.

Sen. Edward Kennedy (news, bio, voting record), a Massachusetts Democrat who has been pushing for the bipartisan immigration overhaul, said he was optimistic the Senate would pass the bill, which also includes a guest worker program backed by President George W. Bush.

"Today''s agreement is a major step forward in our fight for tough but fair immigration reform," Kennedy said.

The Senate bill includes border security and enforcement measures, but also addresses the estimated 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants living in the United States. Millions would be given a chance to earn citizenship.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 5/11/2006 7:20:14 PM
Author: tawn
No, I found it ironic because people are trying so darn hard to get into America, yet the Americans were trying to get to into Canada! Seemed a little amusing to me...

I don't find it ironic at all. People who are dirt poor and politically repressed would give their eye teeth to live in either Canada or the United States, where there is democracy and a standard of living considered fabulous by much of the world. However, people who are educated, who can work in a capacity to enrich a technologically advanced society, are desirable to any country. These educated élite have the luxury of picking and choosing in which country they will live. Within this select group there will be some who prefer Canada or Great Britain (or another democratic and wealthy country) to the United States. I can certainly understand why the current régime would drive out someone who could choose to live in Canada!

 

[tawn]

Date: 5/11/2006 9:02:49 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 5/11/2006 7:20:14 PM
Author: tawn
No, I found it ironic because people are trying so darn hard to get into America, yet the Americans were trying to get to into Canada! Seemed a little amusing to me...

I don''t find it ironic at all. People who are dirt poor and politically repressed would give their eye teeth to live in either Canada or the United States, where there is democracy and a standard of living considered fabulous by much of the world. However, people who are educated, who can work in a capacity to enrich a technologically advanced society, are desirable to any country. These educated élite have the luxury of picking and choosing in which country they will live. Within this select group there will be some who prefer Canada or Great Britain (or another democratic and wealthy country) to the United States. I can certainly understand why the current régime would drive out someone who could choose to live in Canada!

Sorry Deb! I think were on different tracks there!

My attempt at levity was apparently completely misread!

Or maybe just not humorous to anyone but me!

It was supposed to be simple humor. It seemed ironic (to me) that people want to come here, but the people here want to go somewhere else...ha ha!? Following along Erma Bombeck''s theory about the grass always being greener over the septic tank...or the borders in this case!

 

[AGBF]

Date: 5/11/2006 11:46:01 PM
Author: tawn
My attempt at levity was apparently completely misread!

I hate it when that happens! And it happens to me all the time since I have a very dry sense of humor which is quite often missed by others. I will keep an eye on you, tawn, and remember not to be too concrete when I am reading your postings!

Deb

 

[perry]

Of note, one of the things I think is missing from the debate is that people mis-state the US''s old immegration policy. People talk of the "golden door" of the past - and mention how many were welcome in the past.... and totally forget that the door was never totally open. There was a screening process - and there were rejections. The door was not wide open.

I do not remember the statistics - and do not have time to look them up; but I think it was on the order of 10% of the people who showed up at ellis island (and the west coast station) were sent back.

Yes the US in the mid 1800''s to early 1900''s accepted a massive immegraton wave. But, it was not an "open door" policy. Only those who met certain qualifications - and who applied for immegration were accepted.

What is different today?

1) The fact that people can apply from their own country and come to this country pre-approved - without having to personally apply and wait to determine their fate at a US immegration center. Thus, the rest of the people already know that they are not approved and are entering illegally.

2) More people are coming from more places in the world to the US that did not come back then.

3) The US no longer has wide open spaces to settle and develop.

4) The US in the last decade (10 years) has accepted more legal immegration than in any decade in it''s history.

The problem is not that the door is not open.

The problem is that many people feel that they can just break the law and get away with it - and the we in the US should then pay for that.

As far as the argument on political oppression: That represents less than 1% of the people who come to america. I have already stated that I feel that this area of the immegration law needs improving (there already are provisions for political oppression in the immegration statures - and I personally know a person from a 3rd world country who immegrated under those statues and then had to fight a multi-year legal battle for final approval of her status).

I do not consider the fact of economics (or lower standard of living) to be a political oppression issue.

One other thing to consider. It is true that the vast majority of people in the US, and other countries, live a lifestyle of high material wealth. That does not necessarily mean that they live a "better" life. Are they more happy? Is their spiritual and family life more in-tune with how it should be? Are they less educated in their ability to think and consider the consequences of actions?

I''m not so sure that high materialism is by itself an indicator of a better life.

Perry

 

[LAJennifer]

good post, perry.

 

[cinnabar]

Date: 5/12/2006 7:23:30 AM
Author: perry

One other thing to consider. It is true that the vast majority of people in the US, and other countries, live a lifestyle of high material wealth. That does not necessarily mean that they live a ''better'' life. Are they more happy? Is their spiritual and family life more in-tune with how it should be? Are they less educated in their ability to think and consider the consequences of actions?

I''m not so sure that high materialism is by itself an indicator of a better life.

It''s been researched:

World Happiness Survey

Nigerians are apparently the happiest people on earth. The USA comes in at number 16, just one place behind New Zealand. Eastern Europe is home to the most dissatisfied nations; Central/South Americans are happier than Romanians and Russians.

Mexicans come in at number two. Odd that such a happy nation should want to move to number sixteen.

These are the factors which, according to the survey, affect whether one is happy or not:

* Genetic propensity to happiness
* Marriage
* Make friends and value them
* Desire less
* Do someone a good turn
* Have faith (religious or not)
* Stop comparing your looks with others
* Earn more money
* Grow old gracefully
* Don''t worry if you''re not a genius