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.
A lot of people who are against amnesty did not quite understand what President Bush was gearing for. There's a big difference between Amnesty and Path-to-citizenship.
Amnesty blankets all illegals as equal and grants them legal status.
Path to citizenship does not lump all immigrants equaly but recognizes the fact that the erroneous stereotype of all immigrants coming from one country, being illiterate and unskilled and unsavvy does not apply to all immigrants.
Path to citizenship recognizes the following:
-there are immigrants who came here legally but something went wrong and they became illegal, nevertheless they contribute to the economy and well-being of America
-there are many immigrants who are even more educated that native Americans
-there are immigrants who are law-abiding, have skills, have assimilitated into the society and because they have stayed here too long, have very little ties with their country of origins.
A lot of people who are against amnesty did not quite understand what President Bush was gearing for. There's a big difference between Amnesty and Path-to-citizenship.
Amnesty blankets all illegals as equal and grants them legal status.
Path to citizenship does not lump all immigrants equaly but recognizes the fact that the erroneous stereotype of all immigrants coming from one country, being illiterate and unskilled and unsavvy does not apply to all immigrants.
Path to citizenship recognizes the following:
-there are immigrants who came here legally but something went wrong and they became illegal, nevertheless they contribute to the economy and well-being of America
-there are many immigrants who are even more educated that native Americans
-there are immigrants who are law-abiding, have skills, have assimilitated into the society and because they have stayed here too long, have very little ties with their country of origins.
[Moderator Cut: Inappropriate]
Last edited by madicarus2000; 07-05-2008 at 11:05 PM..
Reason: Per TOS: Be civil, no personal attacks, flaming, or insults
Invading Iraq was looked at by some as "A Pathway to Democracy".....but really seemed an awful lot like a plain old invasion.
As a matter of fact, a "Pathway to Citizenship" already exists, in numerous places throughout the world, and it has been in use for a very long time. It begins at the gate of the local US Consulate, runs through the garden, in through the door, and it ends at the window labeled "U.S. IMMIGRATION...Please take a number and be seated. Someone will be with you shortly. Thank you for your patience".
Location: Huntersville/Charlotte, NC and Washington, DC
26,699 posts, read 41,733,093 times
Reputation: 41381
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimjames3000
A lot of people who are against amnesty did not quite understand what President Bush was gearing for. There's a big difference between Amnesty and Path-to-citizenship.
Amnesty blankets all illegals as equal and grants them legal status.
Path to citizenship does not lump all immigrants equaly but recognizes the fact that the erroneous stereotype of all immigrants coming from one country, being illiterate and unskilled and unsavvy does not apply to all immigrants.
Path to citizenship recognizes the following:
-there are immigrants who came here legally but something went wrong and they became illegal, nevertheless they contribute to the economy and well-being of America
-there are many immigrants who are even more educated that native Americans
-there are immigrants who are law-abiding, have skills, have assimilitated into the society and because they have stayed here too long, have very little ties with their country of origins.
I couldn't care less what you call it. Call it amnesty, pathway to citizenship, second chance, whatever. Granting it will be a massive mistake for the United States.
A lot of people who are against amnesty did not quite understand what President Bush was gearing for. There's a big difference between Amnesty and Path-to-citizenship
Amnesty blankets all illegals as equal and grants them legal status.
Path to citizenship does not lump all immigrants equaly but recognizes the fact that the erroneous stereotype of all immigrants coming from one country, being illiterate and unskilled and unsavvy does not apply to all immigrants.
Path to citizenship recognizes the following:
-there are immigrants who came here legally but something went wrong and they became illegal, nevertheless they contribute to the economy and well-being of America
-there are many immigrants who are even more educated that native Americans
- there are immigrants who are law-abiding, have skills, have assimilitated into the society and because they have stayed here too long, have very little ties with their country of origins.
Law-abiding? First of all- illegals are all here illegally. Second of all-one of the most recent amnesty-oops sorry-"comprehensive immigration reform" tries would have granted the chance to "stay here" to gang members who simply had to state they were no longer a gang member. Real strict criteria.
Call it whatever pretty name you want. If they are here illegally and whatever comes out of congress/white house lets them legally stay here then it is amnesty and wrong.
Invading Iraq was looked at by some as "A Pathway to Democracy".....but really seemed an awful lot like a plain old invasion.
As a matter of fact, a "Pathway to Citizenship" already exists, in numerous places throughout the world, and it has been in use for a very long time. It begins at the gate of the local US Consulate, runs through the garden, in through the door, and it ends at the window labeled "U.S. IMMIGRATION...Please take a number and be seated. Someone will be with you shortly. Thank you for your patience".
But of course........
Just that some people think they are 'too good' to abide by the rules.
jimjames3000, I apologize for the BS Meter. It wasn’t intended to inflame or insult you. I was simply in a silly mood last night, and didn’t consider that it might be perceived as offensive.
While I’m sure you are sincere in your belief, you obviously don’t realize “a path to citizenship” is simply a euphemism for “amnesty” -- just as “undocumented” is a euphemism for “illegal alien.” It’s a ploy being fed to the sheeple in an attempt to “reward” those illegally residing in our country with the “gift” of legalization. Illegal aliens have not “earned” the right to become legal citizens, and it is an affront to all of those who choose to follow our laws.
Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR) does not put illegal aliens at the back of the line. If so, they would be required to return to their countries of origin and apply for legal status through the proper channels. Rather, they would be permitted to remain in this country, and would essentially be absolved of their crimes for using stolen or fake social security numbers. Moreover, the unscrupulous businesses that knowingly employ illegals in flagrant violation of our laws would not be punished. The criminals would win, and the law-abiding U.S. citizens would lose.
One of the most outrageous provisions of CIR would enable gang bangers to simply “renounce” their gang membership to qualify for legal status. It’s a sham, pure and simple.
jimjames3000, I apologize for the BS Meter. It wasn’t intended to inflame or insult you. I was simply in a silly mood last night, and didn’t consider that it might be perceived as offensive.
While I’m sure you are sincere in your belief, you obviously don’t realize “a path to citizenship” is simply a euphemism for “amnesty” -- just as “undocumented” is a euphemism for “illegal alien.” It’s a ploy being fed to the sheeple in an attempt to “reward” those illegally residing in our country with the “gift” of legalization. Illegal aliens have not “earned” the right to become legal citizens, and it is an affront to all of those who choose to follow our laws.
Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR) does not put illegal aliens at the back of the line. If so, they would be required to return to their countries of origin and apply for legal status through the proper channels. Rather, they would be permitted to remain in this country, and would essentially be absolved of their crimes for using stolen or fake social security numbers. Moreover, the unscrupulous businesses that knowingly employ illegals in flagrant violation of our laws would not be punished. The criminals would win, and the law-abiding U.S. citizens would lose.
One of the most outrageous provisions of CIR would enable gang bangers to simply “renounce” their gang membership to qualify for legal status. It’s a sham, pure and simple.
Well said..(and, personally, I don't think the "BS meter" was any more out-of-line than MANY things I see on this forum)...
Euphemisms are, and will continue to be, just that...a way to 'side-track' the issue by making the unacceptable sound acceptable. If it isn't "BS", then it's at least compost. MOST euphemistic phraseology used in this situation (i.e. "immigration" rather than "illegal entry"....."the undocumented" rather than the "trespassers") is simply a 'softening' of the facts, to make a bad situation seem less bad. Nobody calls drunk drivers "the unsober"....and nobody calls muggers "spontaneous borrowers"...it would sound plain ridiculous. Yet there is a massive effort to make illegals "just like the rest of us", and thus take the 'sting' out of what they're doing.
The plain fact is that this is NOT about 'people who just want to work'. We had a succesful program for THAT for many years..it was called the 'bracero' program. It was approved by the US and Mexican governments. It supplied American employers with labor, it supplied Mexican workers with income, and it worked. And nobody got mad, because it was a matter of economics. You came, you worked, you got paid, and you went home with some cash. If you liked your employer, and he liked you, you could do the same thing next season. NONE of this, though, implied that you had a right to live permanently in the US.
Today we talk about "exploiting" people. We "bring them here, use them, and now want them to leave". Well, as a matter of fact, yes. That's how business works.
Last year I had a plumber in my house. I brought him in....'used' him...paid him off....and then I expected him to leave...which he did. I did NOT invite him to stay on in my house, nor did he insist on 'doing more' for me. Our business was concluded, and he and I parted company. Had I 'exploited' him? I suppose Karl Marx would tell us ALL LABOR involves 'exploitation'. But Karl Marx was a pretty scary guy.
If people want to sneak into the US illegally, they do so on a voluntary basis. If they manage to find work, and if they are PAID for their work, then that's their choice. If they understand the illegality of what they're doing (which 99.9% DO), then it's a matter of simply 'gambling', and that's that.
But when the 'game is up', and things close in, you can't then scream about your 'expectations' and how you've been 'lured here'. And that's what we're trying to do.....we 'made' them come here, so now they're 'our' responsibility.
That type of reasoning wouldn't hold up in most areas of life....and it shouldn't hold up here.
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.
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.
