U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-23-2010, 09:41 PM
 
4 posts, read 3,176 times
Reputation: 12

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by blacknight04 View Post
Really irks you to see that there are other different points of view on this issue huh?
That works both ways, doesn't it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-23-2010, 10:02 PM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,261,362 times
Reputation: 2130
Quote:
Originally Posted by blacknight04 View Post
Really irks you to see that there are other different points of view on this issue huh?
Actually, speaking for myself what is irritating is that those anti-American, anti-law's views expressed can't be defended by those who hold them but we have to hear them anyway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2010, 10:39 PM
 
344 posts, read 155,534 times
Reputation: 46
So the main argument that's being proposed is that it's simply anti-American, thus shouldn't happen. Great policy stance!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2010, 10:45 PM
 
Location: Spokane via Sydney,Australia
6,611 posts, read 11,046,902 times
Reputation: 3085
"MOST likely voters" - oh puhlease - from a poll of 1,000 in a nation of over 300 million ????? Can we say extrapolate?

[quote]National Survey of 1,000 Likely Voters
Conducted September 16-17, 2010 [quote]

Nothing like being desperate to push your agenda.............
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2010, 10:52 PM
 
344 posts, read 155,534 times
Reputation: 46
[quote=Opyelie;16010787]"MOST likely voters" - oh puhlease - from a poll of 1,000 in a nation of over 300 million ????? Can we say extrapolate?

[quote]National Survey of 1,000 Likely Voters
Conducted September 16-17, 2010
Quote:

Nothing like being desperate to push your agenda.............
That's actually pretty standard wording and methodology.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2010, 11:05 PM
 
Location: Maryland
15,179 posts, read 15,943,747 times
Reputation: 3028
Quote:
Originally Posted by blacknight04 View Post
Really irks you to see that there are other different points of view on this issue huh?
No, not at all. We are all entitled to our opinion. However, many have formed an opinion based on deception. If the entire truth were told, few would even consider supporting the Nightmare Act. Why do you think the sponsors only emphasize college students and military recruits, while ignoring untold millions of others who would also be covered under this bill?

Why don’t we ever hear them utter a word about the millions enrolled in our primary and secondary schools who would be legalized through the DREAM Act? In addition, wouldn’t their parents also be legalized? After all, we certainly can’t expect children age 12-17 to remain here on their path to citizenship unless their criminal parents also remain, now can we?

Why don’t they emphasize those in their 20’s and 30’s who are married with children, who would also qualify due to the 35 age limit? Oh, that’s right. . . . they were brought here by their parents. Someone 35 would have to have been here for 20 years due to the requirement that one must have entered prior to age 16. So, in 20 years they were unable to change their status or attend college? Well, that's just too bad.

Why have DREAMies been instructed to send their baby pictures to members of Congress? I can hear them now, “Oh, look how cute he/she is. Surely, this innocent baby deserves a chance.” Mind you, these DREAMie “babies” are now in their 20’s and 30’s.

On Tuesday, the DREAM Act peddlers touted this bill as being the answer to every recruiter’s prayer. When in reality, all branches have met or surpassed their quotas. They aren’t hurting for recruits. More importantly, a large segment of the DREAMie population would be ineligible due to age limits. DREAMies over the age of 28 would be ineligible for the Air Force, Coast Guard, and the Marines. As a matter of fact, at the DREAMie age limit of 35, one can ONLY join the Army. Interesting.

If passed, not only would adults “DREAMies” be legalized, but also the parents of minor children -- the same parents who willfully violated our laws. Tell me this isn’t piecemeal amnesty. Tell me this isn’t total BS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2010, 11:31 PM
 
344 posts, read 155,534 times
Reputation: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar View Post
No, not at all. We are all entitled to our opinion. However, many have formed an opinion based on deception. If the entire truth were told, few would even consider supporting the Nightmare Act. Why do you think the sponsors only emphasize college students and military recruits, while ignoring untold millions of others who would also be covered under this bill?

Because it's pretty logical to try to normalize the status of those fighting in wars and those that would increase the collective college attainment rate (there is a direct correlation between college attendance and competitiveness abroad).

Why don’t we ever hear them utter a word about the millions enrolled in our primary and secondary schools who would be legalized through the DREAM Act? In addition, wouldn’t their parents also be legalized? After all, we certainly can’t expect children age 12-17 to remain here on their path to citizenship unless their criminal parents also remain, now can we?

This has nothing to do with the actual policy.

Why don’t they emphasize those in their 20’s and 30’s who are married with children, who would also qualify due to the 35 age limit? Oh, that’s right. . . . they were brought here by their parents. Someone 35 would have to have been here for 20 years due to the requirement that one must have entered prior to age 16. So, in 20 years they were unable to change their status or attend college? Well, that's just too bad.

There is nothing about the actual policy, simply assumptions and speculations.

Why have DREAMies been instructed to send their baby pictures to members of Congress? I can hear them now, “Oh, look how cute he/she is. Surely, this innocent baby deserves a chance.” Mind you, these DREAMie “babies” are now in their 20’s and 30’s.

Again more speculation and assumptions. Nothing factual or actually dealing with the actual implications.

On Tuesday, the DREAM Act peddlers touted this bill as being the answer to every recruiter’s prayer. When in reality, all branches have met or surpassed their quotas. They aren’t hurting for recruits. More importantly, a large segment of the DREAMie population would be ineligible due to age limits. DREAMies over the age of 28 would be ineligible for the Air Force, Coast Guard, and the Marines. As a matter of fact, at the DREAMie age limit of 35, one can ONLY join the Army. Interesting.

This is true. There has been an upswing in recruitment. However, if you increase the number of people, statistically you also increase the odds of getting more qualified candidates. When you open to more people, you can get a higher number of extremely qualified individuals.


If passed, not only would adults “DREAMies” be legalized, but also the parents of minor children -- the same parents who willfully violated our laws. Tell me this isn’t piecemeal amnesty. Tell me this isn’t total BS.

Now the question becomes is that a bad thing? Not on a moral perspective, but rather on a policy perspective. If so, how would you change the proposed policy?
Comments in red.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2010, 11:35 PM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
16,122 posts, read 20,335,459 times
Reputation: 8228
Military Service should be a mandatory requirement of citizenship for everyone. Anyone not willing to serve shouldn't get to vote
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-24-2010, 12:01 AM
 
3,876 posts, read 3,205,153 times
Reputation: 2508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boompa View Post
Military Service should be a mandatory requirement of citizenship for everyone. Anyone not willing to serve shouldn't get to vote
Isn't it mandatory for men in Israel ? Not a bad Idea for America's youth as it would give them discipline and open new doors for them.

But extremely difficult in this day of age with an obesity epidemic/out of shape Americans as it would make for a pathetic fighting force. I can hardly imagine some of the people you see every day who have difficulty walking around an air conditioned mall going on long marches or in combat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-24-2010, 12:03 AM
 
Location: Phoenix,Arizona
3,893 posts, read 4,588,686 times
Reputation: 3895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boompa View Post
Military Service should be a mandatory requirement of citizenship for everyone. Anyone not willing to serve shouldn't get to vote
Please define Everyone

or are you just referring to illegals seeking amnesty
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top