From: Jack Hollis on
On Wed, 05 May 2010 19:12:36 -0600, Howard Brazee <howard(a)>

>>3. Children born to illegal aliens in the US are not US citizens.
>There is no doubt in my mind that the Supreme Court would throw that
>out without a Constitutional Amendment.

Not necessarily. The original intent of this provision of the 14th
Amendment was to protect freed slaves from being denied citizenship.
Many legal scholars feel that an act pf Congress would be sufficient
to clarify the law.
From: kenpitts on
On May 6, 11:31 am, "R&B" <none_of_your_busin...(a)> wrote:
> On 2010-05-05 18:14:00 -0400, BAR said:
> > In article <2010050508064995026-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom>,
> > none_of_your_busin...(a) says...
> >> On 2010-05-05 07:52:21 -0400, BAR said:
> >>> In article <381be576-838e-4120-b7e3-3cd6524f05e7
> >>>>, johnb...(a) says...
> >>>> On May 4, 5:44 pm, "dene" <d...(a)> wrote:
> >>>>> "John B." <johnb...(a)> wrote in message
> >>>>>news:cb413622-2da1-415b-8b59-4e2f16cc6ba6(a)
> >>>>> On May 4, 12:28 pm, "dene" <d...(a)> wrote:
> >>>>>> "Howard Brazee" <how...(a)> wrote in message
> >>>>>>news:5s10u5999v9sgj93s7n0u6ug65gmabv604(a)
> >>>>>>> Neither true Liberals nor true Conservatives all agree. Only the
> >>>>>>> non-thinkers accept someone else's opinions completely.
> >>>>>>> One proposal I've seen from the left which has a better chance of
> >>>>>>> working than the rightest proposals is to provide better and cheaper
> >>>>>>> ways for employers to verify a person's right to work. This could
> >>>>>>> be with a bio-metric ID card.
> >>>>>> I like this idea. Frankly, I don't see what the fuss is with the Az. law.
> >>>>>> If you have a driver's license, you're legal. If not, prove otherwise.
> >>>>>> -Greg
> >>>>> Having a drivers license doesn't make you legal. Not having one
> >>>>> doesn't make you illegal. The problem with the AZ law is that police
> >>>>> departments and officers who like it are going to enforce it zealously
> >>>>> and those that don't are going to ignore it.
> >>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> That's better than the liberal solution, i.e. better than nothing.
> >>>>> -Greg
> >>>> The liberal solution is not "nothing." It's to have comprehensive,
> >>>> nationwide immigration reform.
> >>> Exactly what is "comprehensive, nationwide immigration reform?"
> >> You don't read much.
> >> "Comprehensive immigration reform" has been explained thousands of
> >> times already.
> >> In fact, it was proposed by George W. Bush.
> > I disagreed with much of what Bush did and proposed domestically.
> > My version of comprehensive immigration reform is that if you are an
> > admitted illegal alien you get shipped back to your country of origin
> > ASAP after we tattoo a "scarlet letter" on your forehead. And, if we
> > have to go through the process and we determine you are an illegal alien
> > you still get sent back to your country of origin with a "scarlet
> > letter" tattooed on your forehead. If you want to become a US citizen
> > then there are legal ways to do so, get in line just like everyone else
> > and do it legally.
> > If people, like those that live near you Randy that scare you, break
> > into your home and steal from you should the be prosecuted or should the
> > be greeted with open arms and asked if there is anything else they want
> > to take?
> > Illegal is illegal and it should be dealt with as a criminal matter.
> > The social injustices of illegal alien's home countries is not going to
> > be solved by having those countries citizens leave and become illegal
> > aliens in other countries.
> By the way, for the record, I'm supportive of the intent behind the law
> passed in Arizona.  I just don't think the law they've passed is the
> right solution.
> I do believe the Arizona law will be struck down as unconstitutional,
> although even that is not a slam dunk given some of the legal hoops
> involved.  But I totally get it why Arizonans are insistent on doing
> SOMETHING about the illegal immigration problem in their state.  
> Washington has passed the buck on this difficult problem for too long
> -- both Democrats and Republicans have taken a pass on it -- largely
> because it's a politically explosive problem to work on.  Politicians
> are damned if they do, damned if they don't on this.  We have only
> ourselves to blame for such a toxic political climate, and for electing
> representatives who are more concerned with protecting their own jobs
> than they are with protecting us.
> But as to the Arizona law specifically...
> Police ask for my papers (drivers license, insurance card) every time I
> get stopped.  So I don't see this as much different.  They don't,
> however, ask to see my proof of citizenship, and therein lies the
> problem with the Arizona law.  A universal national ID card would solve
> this, where all your information -- citizenship, driver's license info,
> social security number, etc. -- is digitally encoded.  Although I also
> understand civil libertarians' resistence to such an idea.
> But where the Arizona law really runs into problems is where police in
> that state won't stop me because I "look" illegal, but they could stop
> Maria or Miguel, my neighbors, who are both second-generation US
> citizens, both born in this country to immigrant citizens of the US.  
> That's where this law runs into serious constitutional questions.  And
> that's why I oppose it.  It places legal citizens in situations we've
> only read about in history books and seen in movies about the Gestapo
> in Germany.  It's unAmerican.
> Randy- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -

My brother in law got stoppped at the border coming from Vancouver BC.
He did not have his green card with him, He was detained for about an
hour. He provided his information. It was verified and then he was on
his way. What is the big deal? Be here legally if you want to be

From: bknight on
On Thu, 6 May 2010 15:55:59 -0700, "dene" <dene(a)>

>"Carbon" <nobrac(a)> wrote in message
>> On Thu, 06 May 2010 10:26:03 -0700, dene wrote:
>> > "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)> wrote in message
>> > news:alangbaker-BBDD34.09552206052010(a)
>> >
>> >>> They can't hold jobs. They go on welfare. They get sick and require
>> >>> medical care they can't pay for. They have children that they can't
>> >>> properly care for and those children grow up to be screw-ups who
>> >>> impose further costs on society.
>> >>
>> >> They're doing all that *now*.
>> >
>> > And the problem would worsen if it were legal. Duh!
>> You're sure of this?
>I'm sure about human nature. Laws and consequences do much to temper our
>Soon, Bobby Knight will be receiving a package for Bubba. He'll never let
>Bubba dump on my yard again.
>Laws and consequences.
Damn. He got out again?

From: kenpitts on
On May 5, 9:47 am, Carbon <nob...(a)> wrote:
> On Wed, 05 May 2010 09:23:22 -0500, MNMikeW wrote:
> > "Carbon" <nob...(a)> wrote in message
> >news:4be16b3f$0$4972$9a6e19ea(a)
> >> On Tue, 04 May 2010 20:42:31 -0700, kenpitts wrote:
> >>> On May 4, 6:43 am, Howard Brazee <how...(a)> wrote:
> >>>> Neither true Liberals nor true Conservatives all agree. Only the
> >>>> non-thinkers accept someone else's opinions completely.
> >>>> One proposal I've seen from the left which has a better chance of
> >>>> working than the rightest proposals is to provide better and
> >>>> cheaper ways for employers to verify a person's right to work. This
> >>>> could be with a bio-metric ID card.
> >>> I agree. Verification for everyone on a payroll. Believe it or not,
> >>> I work at a defense contractor and the guys who just renovated the
> >>> area next to mine were all speaking Spanish. I would bet less than a
> >>> quarter of them should have been working at all.
> >>> Send them all back where they came from. It cheapens the
> >>> accomplishments of those who immigrated legally.
> >> How many American citizens do you know who would be willing to work
> >> 12 hour days bent over picking strawberries for less than minimum
> >> wage, with no benefits?
> > Perhaps the employers shouldn't be doing this in the first place.
> No interfering with the free market, you socialist!- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -

I have no problem with enforcing our immigration laws. If that means
going where they are working and arresting the people who employ these
illegals, I have no problem with that. The going rate would reset on
these less desirable jobs as the available pool of labor becomes less
flooded. If I have to pay 50 cents more per basket for strawberries,
then that is the free market at work.

From: kenpitts on
On May 6, 8:03 am, "John B." <johnb...(a)> wrote:
> On May 5, 11:52 pm, kenpitts <ken.p...(a)> wrote:
> > On May 5, 11:36 am, bkni...(a) wrote:
> > > On Wed, 5 May 2010 11:21:30 -0500, "MNMikeW" <MNMiik...(a)>
> > > wrote:
> > > >===========================================
> > > >The only people willing to do farm labor for less than min wage are
> > > >illegal's. With unemployment around 10% I would imagine there are more than
> > > >a few what would do it.
> > > Then why aren't they?   The simple fact of cheap Mexican labor is that
> > > they're willing to work hard for little money.....Americans aren't.
> > > The U.S. is to blame for the Mexican dope trade too.  Guess who's
> > > buying it?
> > > So if we could find American workers who wouldn't mind hard work, and
> > > lay off heroin products, it would go a long way in fixing both
> > > problems.  :-)
> > > BK
> > I happen to kinow there are many construction jobs where the
> > superintendant will not hire anyone but an illegal Mexican. Two
> > reasons, skilled craftsmen and lower wages. I know this from a retired
> > superintendant.
> > They have renovated very near my area at work. I can hear what goes on
> > every day for weeks now. Every single worker speaks exclusively
> > Spanish. And the Mexican foreman was the only one I heard that could
> > speak English at any level with the contractor and the facilities
> > manager at the plant. We're talking defense plant here. Bottom line at
> > least 50% of these guys are here illegally. They should be on the next
> > bus to Nuevo Laredo. If they won't even certify this job, will they
> > certify any job?
> > Send the illegals back. We have done it before. The labor situation
> > will right itself as the free market dictates. I guarantee there will
> > be people (perm residents and citizens) willing to take those
> > slaughterhouse jobs.
> >
> > Before you take off on me about racism, I work for a Hispanic manager
> > and we get along great. Guess what, he agrees with me 100% because his
> > family all came here legally. So did my wife and all my in-laws.
> > Ken- Hide quoted text -
> > - Show quoted text -
> Try to imagine what it would take and what it would be like to round
> up 12m people and deport them. It would be extremely expensive and
> difficult. Police kicking down doors every day and night all across
> the country. TV images of poor Latinos and their children being
> dragged, crying, from their mobile homes and forced onto buses. Long
> lines of buses at the Mexican border. And what about the millions who
> came from Guatemala and El Salvador? Do we fly them back to their
> countries of origin? What if the Guatemalan and Salvadoran governments
> won't let the planes land? There would be so many negative
> consequences, you could write a book about them.
> We can't afford to do this, either financially or politically. And
> there simply aren't 12m Americans who are willing to do the dirty jobs
> that the illegal aliens do.- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -

Send them back We have to start somewhere. As it is we are doing
nothing and they are a huge burden. I say we cannot afford not to do

The free market will take care of the jobs that are vacated. Maybe the
conditions or the technology will have to improve. Your solution is no