Mike Gravel for President 2008 (Washington: prices, land, transit)

[mike0421]

Originally Posted by nicolem

Thank you for doing it the right way. It was tough and it should be-and I don't say that in a mean way. So many people want to come here-we should have a handle on who comes here, we should know about them etc. To me that is just common sense.

It really gets me angry when we have respectful people such as yourself play by the rules and law breakers jump the border. Legal immigrants play by the rules and in many ways the illegal aliens are rewarded-not right.

The lottery is an extension of bad immigration policy leading back to the 1965 Immigration Act-another winner of an act by Ted Kennedy. Seems we had too many people here from England, Ireland etc. We should not have quotas or lotteries. It should be first come first serve so to speak. Get in line, pay what you need to, pass all the criteria.

The single worst piece of legislation that ever passed by a president's signature. This has launched deleterious conditions that we will be paying for out of pocket for decades to come. Thank you for mentioning it.

By the way, while I feel bad for Kennedy's recent health news, let us not forget he should never have had the ability to sit more than two terms in the Senate, due to what happened on July 19th 1969. If you read this article, you can only come to the conclusion this man should still be serving time: http://www.ytedk.com/chapter5.htm

[njkate]

Originally Posted by nicolem

Thank you for doing it the right way. It was tough and it should be-and I don't say that in a mean way. So many people want to come here-we should have a handle on who comes here, we should know about them etc. To me that is just common sense.

It really gets me angry when we have respectful people such as yourself play by the rules and law breakers jump the border. Legal immigrants play by the rules and in many ways the illegal aliens are rewarded-not right.

The lottery is an extension of bad immigration policy leading back to the 1965 Immigration Act-another winner of an act by Ted Kennedy. Seems we had too many people here from England, Ireland etc. We should not have quotas or lotteries. It should be first come first serve so to speak. Get in line, pay what you need to, pass all the criteria.

call me mean but I just don't have all the teary eyed sympathy going around right now for Sen Kennedy..wouldn't wish a brain tumor on my worst enemy..but finding it hard to sympathize with his dilemna

[nicolem]

Originally Posted by njkate

call me mean but I just don't have all the teary eyed sympathy going around right now for Sen Kennedy..wouldn't wish a brain tumor on my worst enemy..but finding it hard to sympathize with his dilemna

You are not mean-finally I have found someone besides my hubby who agrees with me. I feel exactly as you do.

[wileynj]

Originally Posted by mike0421

The single worst piece of legislation that ever passed by a president's signature. This has launched deleterious conditions that we will be paying for out of pocket for decades to come. Thank you for mentioning it.

By the way, while I feel bad for Kennedy's recent health news, let us not forget he should never have had the ability to sit more than two terms in the Senate, due to what happened on July 19th 1969. If you read this article, you can only come to the conclusion this man should still be serving time: YTedK:Ted Kennedy, the truth about Chappaquiddick, and more...

I pretty sure most of the Kennedy's should have been his cell mate! Not a huge fan of the family... well except Jr. and his gazillionaire sister.

[CuCullin]

Originally Posted by nicolem

That was legal immigration. They needed a sponsor who would be financially responsible for them. They were tested for health issues and were not allowed in if there were certain issues. If they did not pass the stringent criteria they were not allowed in this country. Totally different from Illegal aliens invading this country. There is no comparison.

Nicolem

So you would prefer we add "as long as they meet our latest criteria, aside from liberty, but skills and enough money to pay off government employees!"

Originally Posted by nicolem

But if they are here illegally-none of them are honest. Just how do they work? Oh that is right with stolen or fake id. That is real honest.

Nicolem

I don't know about you, but if my family is starving, I'm going to do whatever it takes. And yes, that would include breaking the law. So you're better than they are because your family had the cash to get in? Or because your family came in sooner?

Originally Posted by UKOK

The border could be protected if we really wanted to stop people running across it. Just think Iron Curtain, Berlin wall etc Seriously,

SCREW THE PEOPLE! SHOOT THEM ALL! We will become a police state, anyone who commits any crime, anything we decide to put on paper, shall be shot on site by the new enforcement officers - we shall call them ORWELL's! Anyone who disagrees will also be shot! Books which do not meet our stringent criteria for morality must be burned!



The USA does not have the money or people to pull something (quite so ridiculous and brainless) off like that. It is NOT feasible. Weak? Your hairbrained idea to have people sitting post along hundreds of miles of road, some borders owned by private entities.. now THAT is weak.

Originally Posted by njkate

CuCullin,

Talk to people who live in the border states of Texas, Arizona, california..especially those living right on the border..it isn't pretty

You mean like my family? I do, quite often, though I'd much rather visit. But it seems due to the massive taxation to support others who do not pay taxes has put a crunch on my wallet, so I don't fly as much anymore, or drive for that matter. Would be nice if other people could contribute to the tax dollars without being takers...

Originally Posted by mike0421

I hear this is what the Mexican Army is told to do at the Guatemalan border in Chiapas. Shoot to kill orders. It's called sovereignty, the right to defend one's borders. It's not really a novel concept. For further proof, go to border of South Africa and Namibia. Or Israel and Lebanon.

You can ride the bus from one side of the border to the other for about $10-$15. Kind of a different scale, compared to the US borders at Mexico and Canada, don't you think?

Wow, that was alot of post. But hey, I was eating lunch, have to give me a chance to reply

[njkate]

Originally Posted by wileynj

I pretty sure most of the Kennedy's should have been his cell mate! Not a huge fan of the family... well except Jr. and his gazillionaire sister.

And you can thank their Mother, jackie O that they did not grow up like their infamous first cousins

[mike0421]

Originally Posted by CuCullin

You can ride the bus from one side of the border to the other for about $10-$15. Kind of a different scale, compared to the US borders at Mexico and Canada, don't you think?

Wow, that was alot of post. But hey, I was eating lunch, have to give me a chance to reply

I'll give you a larger border example, then. Russia's fortified border with China and Mongolia. We could throw Kazakhstan and the Ukraine in for good measure.

[Obrero]

Originally Posted by CuCullin

SCREW THE PEOPLE! SHOOT THEM ALL! We will become a police state, anyone who commits any crime, anything we decide to put on paper, shall be shot on site by the new enforcement officers - we shall call them ORWELL's! Anyone who disagrees will also be shot! Books which do not meet our stringent criteria for morality must be burned!



The USA does not have the money or people to pull something (quite so ridiculous and brainless) off like that. It is NOT feasible. Weak? Your hairbrained idea to have people sitting post along hundreds of miles of road, some borders owned by private entities.. now THAT is weak.

My goodness you're worked up. I didn't say we should shoot everybody who disagrees with us - why would you even go there or say that? I merely suggested that if we wanted to secure the borders we could. Saying it's too expensive or it won't work or it's too much trouble is so defeatist, I really can't stand it.

Unfortunately, your "can't do" attitude is one I am seeing more and more.

[njkate]

Originally Posted by mike0421

I'll give you a larger border example, then. Russia's fortified border with China and Mongolia. We could throw Kazakhstan and the Ukraine in for good measure.

Where there is a will there is a way for sure
many land locked countries don't have half the problem we do with illegals

[CuCullin]

Originally Posted by mike0421

I'll give you a larger border example, then. Russia's fortified border with China and Mongolia. We could throw Kazakhstan and the Ukraine in for good measure.

Ah, yes. The russian border patrol, which has accomplished its protection by shooting people who are there legally, such as fisherman, primarily because the territory is disputed between Russia and Japan. I wouldn't exactly say that I hope the US becomes like Russia.

Originally Posted by UKOK

My goodness you're worked up. I didn't say we should shoot everybody who disagrees with us - why would you even go there or say that?

You're saying that because its illegal, we should be able to shoot them. So why stop there? Sorry, but here I thought I was born and raised in a country that supported freedom, a right to due process, a place of individual rights and opportunity for prosperity. What you're proposing (aside from the fact that it seriously wouldn't work) highly resembles an orwellian police state.

Originally Posted by UKOK

I merely suggested that if we wanted to secure the borders we could. Saying it's too expensive or it won't work or it's too much trouble is so defeatist, I really can't stand it.

Unfortunately, your "can't do" attitude is one I am seeing more and more.

Apparently you're missing this - its not an attitude. Its a reality. Homeland Security's (those police state folks we have today) Secretary Chertoff stated that a 2000 mile border fence, along the lines of what would be needed to pull off something like you're suggesting, would cost too much - between 4 and 8 billion dollars. Mexico has come out and said they will not tolerate some "so stupid" (yes, thats a quote) as such a wall. The costs of manning such a wall, according to Homeland Security, would be "astronomical" and "economically unfeasible".

Plus, in case you didn't know, the largest problem isn't border hopping by land... its tunnels. Which, btw, makes a wall completely useless. Along with your snipers. Who would be shooting someone within the US borders if they saw them at all. With no way of knowing the legality of their presence.

So... its not an attitude, its the truth. It would not work.