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.
I don't think there's anything wrong with giving generous help to families who are poor immigrants; families who are poor, period. Why is there so much animosity about aid programs that help people, yet there's little outrage over the international military conflicts that are sucking up xxx% more of "your money" than aid programs ever have?
I don't think there's anything wrong with giving generous help to families who are poor immigrants; families who are poor, period. Why is there so much animosity about aid programs that help people, yet there's little outrage over the international military conflicts that are sucking up xxx% more of "your money" than aid programs ever have?
One has nothing to do with the other.
This country has helped millions of (legal) immigrants. Illegals have no right to be here and even less rights to any form of assistance.
The outrage is over the assumption that it is somehow owed to the illegal that we fed them and give them a free ride.
The outrage is about how our government lies to us and claims that no illegals receive welfare or food stamps.
This is the illegal immigration forum...
Let me get this right, now. You're telling us that President George W. Bush put her on the public dole and looked the other way, and what he did and allowed has cost us all that money all of these years? Why, that's terrible.
Your anger is irrelevant to the immigration reform the Congress will approve.
Let me get this right, now. You're telling us that President George W. Bush put her on the public dole and looked the other way, and what he did and allowed has cost us all that money all of these years? Why, that's terrible.
Your anger is irrelevant to the immigration reform the Congress will approve.
So GW put her on it 20 years ago? GW wasn't President 20 years ago. In fact it was Clinton that was President 20 years ago.
So GW put her on it 20 years ago? GW wasn't President 20 years ago. In fact it was Clinton that was President 20 years ago.
Yes, you're correct. And I stand corrected.
You should try admitting that once and a while. Though you'd probably get tired of doing that, so often.
Thanks, again.
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.