Tonight's Presidential Speech

Started by National Acrobat, May 15, 2006, 07:34:58 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

National Acrobat

Anyone here think it will have any substance? Anything new to tell us? Polls show that he is way off base with the average American concerning what they want done about immigration, and that the conservative base is starting to abandon him. Do you think that he will reverse some of his course, or attempt to persuade Americans that what he wants is 'right?'


RogueJedi

From what I have heard in Sen. Allen's office, he might have to advocate a more hands-on approach to illegal immigration.  Such as putting some show of military force on the borders.  That is what I have heard.  It might not be the case, but I am in support of, at the very least, that.

National Acrobat

I know that there has been talk of using the National Guard, but Senator Hagel mentioned this morning that was a good idea, but they were stretched too thin.

President Fox of Mexico is urging, of course, that there not be any military on the border.

I think the President is going to have to resign himself to the fact that his views on immigration are way out of touch with the American citizens, and that he's going to have to come to terms with the bill passed by the House of Representatives.

I hope that is some of what he says tonight.

RogueJedi

Which bill?  The one that Cantor helped craft and support?

I mean I am very much anti-ILLEGAL immigration.  I do support legal immigration though.

GoldenChild

Don't bet on it. I expect that he will keep on his already set path, he has nothing to loose to do so.

National Acrobat

Yeah, the one that makes it a Felony to be in the country illegally, and would authorize localities to arrest and deport folks. It's the one that is basically the opposite of the one the Senate wishes to pass.

I know that there are going to be terse negotiations between the House and Senate on that. The bill should be interesting in the final form.

I am totally pro-legal immigration as well. I think what bothers me the most about the illegal immigration issue is that the politicians treat it like a game, but you know when the average citizen breaks a law, we get the book thrown at us, but here the President is basically trying to reward illegal behavior.

A good friend of mine is hispanic, second generation with her parents having migrated from Mexico and Cuba respectively, and both of them support the House Bill, because they think everyone should have to go through what they did to enter this country legally. Her father enlisted in the US army actually, which helped him gain his citizenship, and he served the nation in return.

RogueJedi

I have many friends that are the same way Rat Salad.  Not only hispanics from Mexico and such, but one of my good friends is from Romania originally.  He had to go through alot to finally get his citizenship.  He is probably one of the most vocal anti-illegal immigration people I know.

What ticks me off, is the politicians sitting there and trying to give ILLEGALS in-state tuition to colleges and such.  What don't they understand about the word illegal?  I mean, I moved to Virginia in my senior year of high school, and I couldn't even get in-state tuition at least for my first year of college.  So, I have problems with such idiotic ideas from our elected officials.

And yes, I am a major supporter of the House bill.  I think George Allen is, but John Warner isn't.  He says it is foolish and unneeded or some such.

National Acrobat

I think Warner is trying to be moderate, which could backfire for him here in Virginia. He's trying to appear to not really take sides on the issue, which might not be a good path to take here in the Old Dominion. Then again, the older Warner gets, the more middle-of-the-road he gets. I'm not entirely sure that he fully supports all aspects of the Senate Bill, but I do know that he feels the House Bill is draconian.

Max

Something I heard that was interesting was that if you were an illegal immigrant in Mexico, that is a crime punishable by two years in prison.  Not sure if it is true or not.  Or whether or not Mexice is trying to keep illegals comming from south of Mexico from crossing into Mexico.  But they do seem so unable to keep people from leaving Mexico and entering the US.  

I do agree, that we must secure the border.  But, what does the House bill say about businesses hiring illlegals/  Or how people will be able to prove that are are legal?  How about the Senate bill?

Newt Gingrich had an idea, a biometric card issued by credit card compnaies.  Think I support that.
"Are you into whips and chains too?"
"No, chainsaws."  (just kidding)

Ons and offs:
https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=4738.new#new

Lilac

Quote from: Rat Salad on May 15, 2006, 07:47:53 AM
I know that there has been talk of using the National Guard, but Senator Hagel mentioned this morning that was a good idea, but they were stretched too thin.

President Fox of Mexico is urging, of course, that there not be any military on the border.

There have been incidents of raids from Mexico into the US by people in military garb and gear.  He should be happy that this is understood to be criminal activity and not an act of war.

In any case, about two-thirds of the American population is in favor of the forcible removal of illegal immigrants from US soil.

Legal immigration is, of course, another story.  But then we need to ask why do families from the Phillipines have to wait twenty years when so many from Mexico refuse to even naturalize with our society?

National Acrobat

http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/SENSEN_104_XML.pdf

That's the text of the HR Bill. All 169 Pages of it. Biometrics is mentioned, as is a verification system that employers could call. I do believe that they are going to be tougher on employers, which in all honesty would help quite a bit.

The Southern Mexican Border with the rest of Central America is heavily patrolled by the Mexican Armed forces. They don't want anyone coming in. However, they don't show the same zeal with their northern border...

Lilac wrote:
QuoteBut then we need to ask why do families from the Phillipines have to wait twenty years when so many from Mexico refuse to even naturalize with our society?

I honestly think it's a total difference in mindset. I don't honestly think a lot of those coming from Mexico want to be US Citizens. I think they just want to work here. Their loyalty is probably still to Mexico, and if you asked the President, he'd probably use that as part of the justification for the Guest Worker Program.


Zakharra

 RogueJedi, the politicians see 'illegal alien' and think, 'Voter!' A good example of that thinking is shown in the various voter registration in itiatives that are being talked about in some states. Alot of people want to have voter ID cards and some kind of state registration/citizenship requirement that is hard to counterfit, yet there are groups like the ACLU and some politicians(mostly Democrat...) that are trying to block this. Saying that it is discrimination to have that. The fact is that they want it to be easy to enroll illegals and get them voting when they do not have the right.

Right now in New York, there are groups that are trying to give the right to vote to non-citizens for local/city elections, but the organizers of that groups have said that they want to eventually give the right to vote to non-citizens, from local all the way up to the Federal leve. President and Congress.

Max

I think there is a fear that placing US troops on the border would antoginze Mexicans, maybe throw the elections there to the socialist who is running for President, and he may throw his lot in with the likes of Venezula's Hugo Chavez.
"Are you into whips and chains too?"
"No, chainsaws."  (just kidding)

Ons and offs:
https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=4738.new#new

Zakharra

Quote from: Max on May 15, 2006, 08:33:32 AM
I think there is a fear that placing US troops on the border would antoginze Mexicans, maybe throw the elections there to the socialist who is running for President, and he may throw his lot in with the likes of Venezula's Hugo Chavez.

Fuck Mexico then. They have no right to bitch at the US enforicng it's laws. The Mexican government can go and screw donkeys for all I care. We have the right, as a sovereign nation to defend our borders. The same as Mexico does. Fox is being very hypocritical in his words.

RogueJedi

Zakharra, you are of course right.  I mean in Florida, the "Anyone but Bush" crowd tried to allow convicted felons to vote.  So, it is something that is expected.

As for the placement of troops, the Mexicans are also saying that if US citizens watch the border, they might have to use their military to assist the illegals to enter the country.  I don't care who you are, but if you try to interfere with the sovereignty of the US, then you are asking for war.  That is the main casus belli the world over.

Zakharra

 They said that they would actively help the illegals cross the border? If they try that, they are asking to loose the rest of their nation. If a single Mexican Federali steps foot across the border, war can be declared. A war that most of the country I think, would support. The illegal alien issue is pissing ALOT of people off...

GoldenChild

I don't think it is the issue of protecting the border that is the problem; it is how you do it. You don't send military against civilians that try to cross a border, that is the police's job.

RogueJedi

The problem is, if I recall correctly, INS and Border Patrol agents have been shot at by individuals wearing Mexican military uniforms when they were trying to capture illegals.  So, it is not only a police thing.  And to be honest, in Arizona, I know several sheriff's officces have asked permission to just shoot the illegals that come over the border.  I know of two instances from personal friends where a group of illegals raped a teenage girl in Arizona after crossing the border.

That is why the Minutemen are so popular in Arizona and Texas at least.

National Acrobat

QuoteI don't think it is the issue of protecting the border that is the problem; it is how you do it. You don't send military against civilians that try to cross a border, that is the police's job.

Perhaps, but then Fox would be caught being a hypocrite if he asks Bush not to do so, as he is doing it on his southern border.

I believe the National Guard is a temporary solution until they can get the recently approved doubling of the Border Patrol from 12,000 to 24,000 trained and on the border. From what I understand, the National Guard will be taking orders from the Border Patrol, so it would be the BP shooting, not the NG.

Also, California is creating a new Border Patrol Unit as part of the State Police, but Ahnold wants the Feds to pay for it.

Zakharra

Quote from: GoldenChild on May 15, 2006, 08:41:32 AM
I don't think it is the issue of protecting the border that is the problem; it is how you do it. You don't send military against civilians that try to cross a border, that is the police's job.

Actualy, you can. The military gives an aoth, when they join to protect the nation against all invaders. Foreign and domestic. Border protection is an acceptable funstion of the US military. An invade r is an invader. There is no distinction between civilian and military in that.

National Acrobat

You would think President Fox would be trying to eradicate people impersonating Mexican Soldiers entering the US before that really gets him and Mexico in a really bad situation. That has the potential to do some serious harm to this issue as well.

RogueJedi

Yeah, well, if anyone even wearing the uniform of the Mexican military comes over the border, I'd say that enough is enough.  I don't like them helping the illegals, and I certainly wouldn't stand for them trying to prevent us from doing our jobs for security.

Max

I am not saying that the US shouldn't secure the border.  We should.  I am not sure if using the military is the best long term solution.  I do support the wall.  Did like the Minute Men idea of building one on private property if the government doesn't act.

Now, I have no problems with the Mexican army making sure the immigrants are safe on THEIR side of the border.  But, the Mexican army has no right being north of said border.  

About the point of the Mexican elections.  If Mexico does go left, and joins up with Chavez, what do you think will happen to gas prices?  I do believe we import a lot of oil from there.  I think Bush would like to wait until the elections are over before acting.  Doubt he will have the time to though.  Think he, and the government, needs to act now.

As fora war against Mexico, once we win it, what do we do with it?

Another thing I would like to see is a big energy program.  Using alternate sources of energy.  Maybe OTC (Ocean Thermal Current).  Maybe nuclear.  Solar, wind power.
"Are you into whips and chains too?"
"No, chainsaws."  (just kidding)

Ons and offs:
https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=4738.new#new

GoldenChild

Quote from: Zakharra on May 15, 2006, 08:47:04 AM
Actualy, you can. The military gives an aoth, when they join to protect the nation against all invaders. Foreign and domestic. Border protection is an acceptable funstion of the US military. An invade r is an invader. There is no distinction between civilian and military in that.

To me that is an enormous difference; as those people in question can’t impossible threaten US in any way. Sure you can use the army against them temporarily but not as a permanent solution, mainly because it is a civilian problem, not a military one.

RogueJedi

I support nuclear energy.  However, the militant environmentalists will never allow that, or anything else.

The other issue with Mexican soldiers firing at BP agents is... they might be firing from their side of the border, but they are aiming at our side of it.