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 08-13-2009, 05:23 PM
 
53 posts, read 79,739 times
Reputation: 25

Advertisements

i know that many democrats and and liberals and hispanic groups want to end illegal immigration, (something that many republicans and conservatives also want to do) but why do many of them not like any increased immigration law enforcement?

why do they not like e-verify? i read that it is about 90% effective but many democratic politicians and hispanic groups (nclr maldef lulac) don't like it. why?

why do many democratic politicians and hispanic groups not like nearly every increased immigration law enforcement act? they dont like the secure communities program, 287g program, save act, no-match rule, clear act and many many

is there something else behind this dissent?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-13-2009, 05:55 PM
 
Location: Northern VA (for now)
23,000 posts, read 31,949,672 times
Reputation: 30382
The democrats need the votes while the hispanic groups want to have "their peoples" back.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2009, 06:00 PM
 
8,973 posts, read 14,612,395 times
Reputation: 2983
(1) Some people feel 'guilty' taking any stand, or any action, against anyone they see as 'less fortunate' than they are. "We're all rich", the reasoning goes, "and they're all poor". Thus, in these people's eyes, limiting the movements of illegals is seen as 'victimizing' the poor..The Catholic Church (my church) relies on this approach in its frequent writings about the problem.

(2) Some people see this as an ethnic (or racial) issue....since the overwhelming majority of today's illegals are from Mexico, or nearby Central America, anyone objecting to illegals is seen as 'persecuting Hispanics'. Hispanic Americans may feel pressured to side with illegals, or risk being accused of 'betraying their people'.

(3) Some people just get a kick out of 'upsetting' mainstream Americans, and will side with ANY cause that makes 'waves' with the public....whether it's illegal immigration or any other cause.

(4) Some people are closely related to illegals, and thus are not able to see the problem objectively; to them, it's a matter of family and loved ones.

(5) A few people are amused by the whole thing, seeing illegal immigration as a sort of 'reconquista', and finding humor in the fact that this is some sort of karmic 'payback' for the 'sins' of America's past..(America, of course, being the ONLY society on earth that's ever 'sinned'). Sort of a 'What GOES AROUND, COMES AROUND' approach.

(6) Finally, many people in this country profit in various ways from the presence of illegals. They like their cheap wages, their willingness to take abuse, and their fear of drawing attention to themselves in the workplace. If every illegal was 'amnestized' tomorrow, THESE people would simply go out and seek NEW illegals, since their businesses rely on 'lowball' workers, not legal ones.

Last edited by macmeal; 08-13-2009 at 06:14 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2009, 05:58 AM
 
Location: North Texas
23,599 posts, read 31,143,716 times
Reputation: 26656
I admit I voted for Barack Obama because on balance I felt he was the better candidate but that does not change the fact that I am very vehemently anti-illegal.

I also voted for Pete Sessions for Congress, though now I no longer live in Pete Sessions's district.

I vote for the candidate, not the party, and I do not think Barack Obama will really amnesty all those illegals if he wants to win a second term. I think if a shamnesty is going to happen, the risk is much greater between 2012 and 2016 if Obama wins a second term.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2009, 06:06 AM
 
2,320 posts, read 5,866,963 times
Reputation: 997
Quote:
Originally Posted by sobejano View Post
i know that many democrats and and liberals and hispanic groups want to end illegal immigration, (something that many republicans and conservatives also want to do) but why do many of them not like any increased immigration law enforcement?

why do they not like e-verify? i read that it is about 90% effective but many democratic politicians and hispanic groups (nclr maldef lulac) don't like it. why?

why do many democratic politicians and hispanic groups not like nearly every increased immigration law enforcement act? they dont like the secure communities program, 287g program, save act, no-match rule, clear act and many many

is there something else behind this dissent?
Power.........the possession of control, authority and influence over others.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2009, 07:08 AM
 
Location: Mesa, Az
21,148 posts, read 36,615,542 times
Reputation: 3785
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigDGeek View Post
I admit I voted for Barack Obama because on balance I felt he was the better candidate but that does not change the fact that I am very vehemently anti-illegal.

I also voted for Pete Sessions for Congress, though now I no longer live in Pete Sessions's district.

I vote for the candidate, not the party, and I do not think Barack Obama will really amnesty all those illegals if he wants to win a second term. I think if a shamnesty is going to happen, the risk is much greater between 2012 and 2016 if Obama wins a second term.
Yeppers: I voted for Obama because the thought of Palin being one heartbeat away from the Presidency scared me even more

That stated; I also voted for Sheriff Joe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2009, 09:12 AM
 
3,536 posts, read 5,076,921 times
Reputation: 822
Money. It's too expensive to end illegal immigration via enforcement only. Imagine the cost of having a wall from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico. Imagine the man power needed to make sure nobody crosses said wall. The sector enforcement doesn't work. The wall in San Diego just pushed illegal immigrants further east. Nothing changed for the city of San Diego.

Conflict. Unfortunately, this has become an ethnic issue. Even on this forum, any time illegal immigration occurs, it conjures images of Hispanic people. Not Asians, Europeans, Africans...Hispanics. This is due to the obvious. However, many that would feel compelled to border enforcement will frame the issue as an Anglo vs. Hispanic issue (not White, but rather American...some may see it as a White vs. Mestizo issue). Enforcement will take a personal tone and could lead to violence. It has happened in the past.

We can find better solutions. We should encourage legal immigration and incentivize that. We should see what other countries are doing and see what they are doing right or wrong. There are better ways than a militarized border zone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2009, 10:14 AM
 
Location: Maryland
15,179 posts, read 15,809,199 times
Reputation: 3028
Quote:
Originally Posted by that1guy View Post
Money. It's too expensive to end illegal immigration via enforcement only. Imagine the cost of having a wall from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico. Imagine the man power needed to make sure nobody crosses said wall. The sector enforcement doesn't work. The wall in San Diego just pushed illegal immigrants further east. Nothing changed for the city of San Diego.

Conflict. Unfortunately, this has become an ethnic issue. Even on this forum, any time illegal immigration occurs, it conjures images of Hispanic people. Not Asians, Europeans, Africans...Hispanics. This is due to the obvious. However, many that would feel compelled to border enforcement will frame the issue as an Anglo vs. Hispanic issue (not White, but rather American...some may see it as a White vs. Mestizo issue). Enforcement will take a personal tone and could lead to violence. It has happened in the past.

We can find better solutions. We should encourage legal immigration and incentivize that. We should see what other countries are doing and see what they are doing right or wrong. There are better ways than a militarized border zone.
Too expensive? How? We wouldn’t need a wall if our laws were in fact being enforced.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2009, 10:22 AM
 
Location: Mesa, Az
21,148 posts, read 36,615,542 times
Reputation: 3785
Quote:
Originally Posted by that1guy View Post
Money. It's too expensive to end illegal immigration via enforcement only. Imagine the cost of having a wall from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico. Imagine the man power needed to make sure nobody crosses said wall. The sector enforcement doesn't work. The wall in San Diego just pushed illegal immigrants further east. Nothing changed for the city of San Diego.

Conflict. Unfortunately, this has become an ethnic issue. Even on this forum, any time illegal immigration occurs, it conjures images of Hispanic people. Not Asians, Europeans, Africans...Hispanics. This is due to the obvious. However, many that would feel compelled to border enforcement will frame the issue as an Anglo vs. Hispanic issue (not White, but rather American...some may see it as a White vs. Mestizo issue). Enforcement will take a personal tone and could lead to violence. It has happened in the past.

We can find better solutions. We should encourage legal immigration and incentivize that. We should see what other countries are doing and see what they are doing right or wrong. There are better ways than a militarized border zone.
Well; I do not know of a single First World nation that has 'birthright citizenship' for anybody born to an illegal alien, it is high time for the USA to fall in line.

Face it: even in Europe; the attitudes against illegals are hardening-------fast.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2009, 10:31 AM
 
2,320 posts, read 5,866,963 times
Reputation: 997
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArizonaBear View Post
Well; I do not know of a single First World nation that has 'birthright citizenship' for anybody born to an illegal alien, it is high time for the USA to fall in line.

Face it: even in Europe; the attitudes against illegals are hardening-------fast.
Fast and too late.
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