Nevadans may be key to new push on immigration

Reid, Ensign are on opposite sides of an issue important to labor, business interests

Saturday, May 30, 2009 | 2 a.m.

Immigration in Las Vegas

Foreclosures, immigration linked in report (5-13-2009)
Hundreds hit Vegas streets for immigration reform (5-1-2009)
Nevada's percentage of illegal immigrants in workforce tops nation (4-14-2009)
A sweep of violent criminals, or deportation scheme? (3-13-2009)
Republicans' red herring (2-5-2009)

Nevada has stood out during four years of congressional efforts to overhaul immigration law because the state boasts several heavyweight supporters of far-reaching changes in the federal system — the Culinary Union and the hospitality industry, in addition to the highest ranking member of Congress.

Nevada is also home of a key opponent of the most significant change backed by those other heavyweights: Republican Sen. John Ensign, fourth in his party’s leadership as chairman of the U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee, which shapes policy on important issues, including immigration.

He wasn’t as prominent in June 2007, when he opposed the last comprehensive bill that focused on illegal immigration.

Nevada’s other senator, Majority Leader Harry Reid, supported that failed bill, including its key aspect — a path to legalization for many of the nation’s estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants. That provision continues to be the sticking point for Ensign.

The prospect of a potentially decisive face-off between the state’s highest ranking elected officials is not lost on a local coalition of labor unions, nonprofit organizations and immigration lawyers set to launch a renewed push for change Monday.

The effort draws into focus the unique roles of Nevada’s two powerful senators on this international issue and highlights immigration’s importance to the state’s future.

Monday’s announcement in Las Vegas is to include representatives of the 55,000-member Culinary Union and the 11,000-member American Immigration Lawyers Association. About 2,800 members of the lawyers group will be in town next week for their annual convention. Other news conferences are planned for 20 states across the nation, as well, to set the stage for President Barack Obama’s June 8 meeting with congressional leaders on the future of immigration law.

Nevada is unique on the national landscape because its main employers and largest union back an approach that includes not just increased border security and expanded visas for workers but amnesty under certain conditions.

A Pew Hispanic Center study estimated that as recently as 2008, Nevada was tops in the nation in the percentage of illegal immigrants in the workforce, with 170,000 workers lacking documentation, or 12.2 percent of the state’s total.

Nevada industry and union leaders embraced the comprehensive approach in the 2007 bill for reasons including keeping families of employees together and ensuring a future flow of employees. Reid has responded to the will of those constituents, says Pilar Weiss, the Culinary Union's political director.

Ensign’s position is “puzzling,” Weiss says.

“He has the same constituents, but has chosen to align himself with the right wing of his party,” Weiss says. Neither Ensign nor Reid could be reached for comment.

In a recent televised interview with CNN’s John King, Ensign said, “I actually believe ... in comprehensive immigration reform,” adding that he would have supported the 2007 bill if the “whole amnesty portion” had been removed — referring to the idea of creating a system allowing those who meet certain requirements to gain legal status.

But if that aspect is removed, “what’s left?” said Wendy Sefsaf, spokeswoman for the Immigration Policy Center, a Washington-based research organization.

“What does that achieve? At what time do you deal with the undocumented? When there are 20 million?”

The Republican Party’s stance puts it “in a delicate position” with the increasingly important Hispanic electorate in Nevada and nationwide, according to Andres Ramirez, vice president of Hispanic programs at NDN, a Washington, D.C.-based research and advocacy organization.

In Nevada, three of four Hispanic voters supported Obama in the general election, according to exit polls — the second-highest show of support among Hispanics nationwide, after New Jersey. In the same election, Hispanics cast 15 percent of all votes in Nevada, a 50 percent increase compared with 2004’s tally.

Immigration, Ramirez said, is a litmus test for Hispanic voters — if they think a candidate, or party, is hostile on the issue, they will show less interest in the candidate’s or party’s overall platform. This occurred in the 2008 election, analysts say.

So the party could “risk alienating Hispanic voters more” by opposing a comprehensive bill, Ramirez said.

As chairman of the Senate’s GOP policy committee, Ensign has recognized the importance of Hispanic voters.

According to a media account of an all-day, private GOP meeting at the Library of Congress this year, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., spoke with colleagues about the issue, attributing his loss in the 2008 presidential race in part to lagging support from Hispanics tied to the immigration issue.

“It was discussed big time,” Ensign said afterward to a reporter for The Hill, a Washington, D.C., publication. “We have to reach out to Hispanics. We need to go on Hispanic media much more.”

Organizations to be involved in Monday’s campaign launch will seek to raise the issue above electoral politics, however. Offering a pathway to legalize undocumented immigrants will help stabilize the economy, by bringing more people onto tax rolls and leveling the playing field for all workers, they say.

In the past, representatives of Las Vegas hotels and restaurants have publicly stated that it would be difficult to continue to staff the valley’s hospitality industry without a steady flow of legal immigrant workers.

The position staked out by PLAN, a Nevada coalition of progressive activists, is: “The (immigration) system as it is now doesn’t work,” said Launce Rake, the group’s spokesman. “We want a country that’s secure. Nobody wants illegal immigration. We want enough visas for people chasing the American dream and to get beyond demagoguery on this issue.”

But practically speaking, putting a broad plan before Congress may turn out to be a showdown between Nevada’s two most visible politicians in Washington. Will Reid be more strident in his support this time around? Will Ensign want to continue to brand the GOP as “the party of ‘no’,” as Sefsaf put it?

Several of those set to participate in Monday’s event point to recent polls that indicate national public opinion is increasingly in favor of a broad overhaul of the immigration system.

A late April Washington Post poll reported that 61 percent of people polled support the broad outlines of a plan giving illegal immigrants “the right to live here legally if they pay a fine and meet other requirements,” up from 52 percent in June 2007.

The coming months may determine whether that opinion resonates in Congress. Whatever the outcome, the effect will be particularly significant in the Las Vegas Valley.

Discussion: 69 comments so far…

By neiman1

5/30/09 at 3:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

Why? Why does our Senator, when more people are out of work and losing homes in Nevada than anywhere, want to legalize the illegal immigrants?

I know who loses. All the citizens and legal immigrants. Why does harry want to thrown them under the bus for the illegals?
By formervegas76

5/30/09 at 3:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

i tend to be left of center but this situation is out of hand. these people are driving wages down all over the country. most of our relatives came here legally, passed thru customs. every employer should be forced to verify their workers citizenship, if person isn't legal, they lose their job.
By fremmasmind

5/30/09 at 4:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

The senate and house both have seperate bills for the Dream Act '09. These bills will give citizenship to any child who was brought into our country by illegal parents and may now be up to the age of 30. There are no records reflecting how old these people were when they were brought into the U.S.
Once they are made citizens they can bring in their parents and relitives with a greencard thru family member. Dirty Harry has signed on to the Senates bill.
Mr. Reid when will you start taking care of the citizens who put you into office?
If the estimate of 175,000 illegals working here in Clark County is true ,sending these illegals back to their countries would leave room for the 150,000 citizens on unemployment to get back to work and start trying to put their lives together.
By Facts_are_Facts

5/30/09 at 4:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

Remove Harry Reid and all illegal immigrates. Allow individuals from other countries to apply to come here legally under the current laws. Punish all employers that hire illegal immigrates. Allow work permits when the need exists as long as all US citizens are employed first.
By SgtRock

5/30/09 at 5:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

Illegals take jobs away from American especially young black males who are entering the job marketplace.

Also illegals drive down wages in the USA.

Why would unions and Democrats support more illegal and legal immigratation?

1) Democrats and Unions see them as potential voters. They have no problem screwing over young black males to get power. They have no problem with driving down wages to get power.

2) Unions see them as potential union members who will pay union memebership fees.

It is all about the money. The more voters then the more power and the more money under the table that they get.
By Tigerbalm

5/30/09 at 6:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

Once again the anti-immigrant faction comes out in full force and without correct information.
1. The Dream Act does not grant citizenship to undocumented individuals. The Dream Act would permit people brought to the United States as children who attended school and graduated from high school to legalize their status and become permanent residents if they enter the military or attend two years college. In addition, they would have to show they are persons of good moral character and have to show they do not otherwise have a basis for being denied entry into the U.S.
2. Not everyone who came into the United States through Ellis Island entered the United States as legal entrants. Many were W.O.P.S.,Without Papers similar to the undocumented of our day. These W.O.P.S. included English, Irish, Italians, Swedes, etc. The name was associated with Italians because they were the greatest number of W.O.P.S. So if you tout that your ancestors came here legally don't be so quick to say that because there is a good possiblity they were W.O.P.S..
3.It is a lie that the undocumented take away jobs and specifically from Black people. There is no evidence to substantiate that. The Immigration Policy Center http://www.immigrationpolicy.org has recently released a study refuting that "non factoid" thrown out by the nativists and other anti-immigrant factions.
4. Immigration reform is needed and it is needed now. Ensign has been an anti-immigrant herald. His presidential ambitions are ludicrous when he has done little more than be a shill for big business and has done little for ordinary citizens in Nevada. If Ensign has any future political ambitions he will need to take into account his Hispanic constituency who voted almost 80% for Barack Obama, the highest Hispanic percentage in the country. Ensign has not been kept accountable. Long overdue accountability will now be placed on him.YESTERDAY WE MARCHED TOMORROW WE VOTE should not be an empty slogan for Ensign.
5. There has never been an amnesty in this country. Every legalization plan (1952, 1986) had requirements that the person be a person of good moral character, demonstrate knowledge of the history and civics of the United States and either pass an exam in ENGLISH or attend English classes in addition to proving they had actually resided in the United States the requisite period of time. Many of those people later became productive, hard working citizens who pursued the American Dream including an aide to John Ensign.
By 2zero

5/30/09 at 7:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

Or the GOP could pass laws making everything english, deporting illegals in mass and prevent that whole "voter" problem?
By gotjobs

5/30/09 at 7:42 a.m.

Suggest removal

I would hope the voters don't fall for this nonsense article which shows the LVS, or at least Pratts position on this issue. Make them all legal, just this one (more) time. Ignore the fact that they broke the law.

As everyone should know the democrats are in charge and the party goal is more voters, not your wishes. Why Ensign is mentioned is beyond me. When Obama took office one of his first statements to the republicans "look, we won" so shut up.

Nancy Pelosi who's lapdog is Reid is on record before a crowd of illegal aliens calling them "true patriots" not you. The president visits Nevada for ONE reason, re-elect Reid on the taxpayers dime. Soon son Rory will carry on, it's a family affair.

If you don't want this illegal amnesty for another 15 million voters then speak up, tell Reid NO. Otherwise suggest you learn spanish.
By Richard

5/30/09 at 8:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

Nevada, many other states, and indeed the Federal Government have got to make up their minds. They have to go through the painful and politically charged process of deciding whether we have any moral obligation to take on the economic burdens of a neighboring country. Ones we did not cause, nor about which were we at fault, generally.

It/they have to decide if it is legitimate pressure and rhetoric to label those opposed to wholesale, unregulated border crossing as anti immigrant, or whether that is nonsense. America has always welcomed diverse cultures to be absorbed into our own, but generally it was in an orderly process, and was accepted as important for growth. It never would have been tolerated when inflows of immigrants would have disenfranchised unemployed citizens already here, or overwhelmed whatever social support systems were in place for citizens and welcome visitors.

The choice is not easy and political lines blur. Not every advocate of reform is liberal, not every proponent of effective borders is right wing. That law, whatever it is, should prevail, should be a non-partisan decision.

And there's the rub. Because dollars in large numbers rear their ugly head, and cloud thinking. Good luck to us.
By SgtRock

5/30/09 at 9:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

"It is a lie that the undocumented take away jobs and specifically from Black people"

You do know that young black males have the highest unemployement rates.

So who jobs are they taking away? People from mars?

Surely you do believe that illegals drive down wages. Why hire a legal black citizen at $15 a hour when one can pay some illegal $6 an hour under the table?

Of course, you could believe in the tooth fairy so I guess you will just throw common sense out the window.
By white_american_433

5/30/09 at 9:37 a.m.

Comment removed by staff.
By SteveV

5/30/09 at 10 a.m.

Suggest removal

Thank you Sen. Ensign for opposing the amnesty provision of "comprehensive immigration reform."
We need more immigration enforcement, not legalization schemes.

And SHAME ON YOU Harry Reid for supporting amnesty for millions of illegal foreign workers when nearly 14 million Americans are out of work.

And let's be clear: Americans still reject amnesty as evidenced by the recent Rasmussen Reports poll that shows "63% of voters say gaining control of the border is more important than legalizing the status of undocumented workers in the country."

The Washington Post push poll quoted in this article is terribly flawed as it did not offer the choice of either legalization or enforcement of laws, as if it did enforcement would win easily.

Get involved now to stop Harry Reid and the cheap labor, anti-American worker special interests from trying to ram another mass amnesty down our throats.

Join NumbersUSA and make your voice heard.
By SgtRock

5/30/09 at 10:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

Your comment is just terrible.

I am not suggesting any ethnic cleansing.

I just want our border secured and our current laws enforced. I am not even suggesting to do a massive return of current illegals.

Are you for real?
By Tigerbalm

5/30/09 at 10:04 a.m.

Suggest removal

Well SgtRock I guess it's asking a bit much too have you do a little research. It appears you would rather take comfort in your sophmoric arguments so I will help you a little bit. This is some distilled info from that report I referenced:

The Immigration Policy Center analyzed the existence of immigrants in the workforce and compares it to African American unemployment. If immigration was having a harmful affect on African American jobs, one would expect to find high unemployment rates among African Americans in areas with large numbers of immigrants in the labor force, especially immigrants who are relatively recent arrivals to the United States and willing to work for lower wages than most African Americans. The IPC report, however, shows just the opposite and, in fact, finds that there is little apparent relationship between recent immigration and unemployment rates among African Americans, or any other native born racial/ethnic group, at the state or metropolitan level.

One example of this is found in comparing Miami and Cleveland:

Recent immigrants are 17 percent of the labor force in Miami, but only 3 percent of the labor force in Cleveland. Yet the unemployment rate for native-born blacks in Cleveland is double that of native-born blacks in Miami. As with most efforts to make simplistic arguments about unemployment, there is no one-to-one relationship between the presence of immigrants and unemployment in the African-American community.

Perhaps this does not make sense to you but it does to National Black organizations such as the NAACP who support comprehensive immigration reform. Take care when racist organizations like the nativists and the anti-immigrant hate groups take up the cause of Blacks in our country. As for white american your comments about ethnic cleansing are disgusting I suggest that your comments should be removed. Interesting you support ethnic cleansing when you as a white American are considered an interloper by Native Americans.
By SteveV

5/30/09 at 10:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

Recall that the 1986 IRCA mass amnesty was supposed to be a one-time event that would finally end illegal immigration with immigration enforcement. And this is exactly what it was -- a mass amnesty which even President Reagan admitted.

But once the amnesty was granted, the promised enforcement soon disappeared -- and illegal immigration skyrocketed. Read Edwin Meese's account of the rampant fraud that occurred after this amnesty was signed into law.

There is no reason to believe anything would be different now. This is why Americans have said loudly and clearly: NO more amnesties, enforce our existing immigration laws.

And as far as the absurd "argument" that mass amnesty will somehow be good for our country and unemployed American workers, no one of sound mind is buying this nonsense.
It's basic supply and demand: more workers = decreased wages and job opportunities.

And as the Heritage Foundation reported, if the terribly flawed 2007 amnesty bill had passed it would have imposed a net cost of at least $2.6 TRILLION on American taxpayers.
By OliverC

5/30/09 at 10:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

Hello???

There was no difference in the immigration position of Obama and McCain, so one can assume Hispanics voted for Obama for some other reason!

Also, watch ole Harry's numbers sink even lower when he goes for amnesty again.

If amnesty is so popular, according to the WAPO, why are the Dems not anxious to stand up and support it. Why are they holding a secret amnesty fest at the White House on June, 8th?

The Washington Post poll is BS. No other polling organization has these numbers. In fact, every other independent polling organization shows an increasing number of Americans opposed to any path to citizenship, including the Dream Act (Rasmussen)

Since when has the WAPO done anything with polls that were not agenda driven--in this case pushing amnesty down our throats.

John Ensign will be done for politically if he supports amnesty!
By nevadaappleslices

5/30/09 at 11:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

This isn't right. We have a high unemployment rate and politicians want to make it easier for immigrants to take jobs here! We've all paid taxes our entire adult life and we should be supporting our fellow Americans, not inviting outsiders to take our jobs. This is so sad.
By Lili

5/30/09 at 11:23 a.m.

Suggest removal

Tigerbalm,
I am with you on this issue!
By odeman

5/30/09 at 12:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

When a new industry comes to town it also creates more jobs in the community. Butchers bakers, road builders, schools, etc. To put it another way, we import illegal immigrants to service the needs of illegal immigrants already here. Then of course we need more illegals to support the illegals that are supporting the illegals. The process goes on and on. So where does it end? When all of our resources are exhausted and the country is one large barrio? Do we open the borders to one and all and have them strip the country clean like locusts on a swarm? Soylent Green anyone? While the country sinks into the cesspool those incompetent employers and politicians who got rich off the backs of illegals are on some sun drenched isolated island basking in plentiful clean air and water. Things we will no longer have. The problem with organizations like immigration.org is that they are either exceptionally biased or they are staffed with intellectuals who value ideas over reality. We have all seen ideas that look great on paper but have failed miserably when reality rears it's ugly head. Us little people live this reality everyday. We are not those eggheads or voteseeking power brokers who go home to the big house in the well to do and heavily guarded and policed upscale community. We see what's going on and that is why we say no to illegals. Saying we are small minded racists is just a copout by the "smart" people to stop the discussion. Do we need to start more businesses that hope to fill our houses with trinkets and junk so as create more jobs and grow? It's time to stop thinking Growth! Growth! Growth! and the quantity of junk we fill our lives with, and go down the path of quality of life. So many intellectuals fail to realize we worked hard to build this country and feel guilty that we have it so good while others don't. To ease their guilt they want to give the country away to all comers not realizing what a disaster it would be.
By dave98112

5/30/09 at 1:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Thank you for this article. We do in fact NEED Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR). It's not amnesty. It would include fines for people to pay and make amends. CIR would not be just enforcing laws, but would include getting rid of the backlog of immigrants already waiting to become residents. How realistic is it to deport 12 million people? It's not. Nor is it realistic to think that we can just make life miserable enough for millions to self deport. There are people who have been here and are part of communities, and hardworking people who contribute greatly to the economy and society, not criminals. The argument that they take jobs from African-Americans is just to pit one minority group against another. Divide and Conquer. We must stop the criminalization of a(nother) race, and stop the big business of detention and deportation of hard-working people who are NOT criminals.
By beachratcarpenter

5/30/09 at 1:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

You should look next door at calif. the state is on the road to colapse. Watch and see every service get cut back.It seems that more was getting taken out of the pot then put in. It seems our neighbors to the south of the border cost the state 11 billion dollars. Bad for tax payer,no safty net for U.S citizens,good for big bussiness,tax payer picks up tab,how long do we have to play this fools game,the labor is only cheap to big bussiness,use E-VERIFY make it legal,people of U.S. still vote so forget special interest, the laws the law,what does illegal mean????????
By SteveV

5/30/09 at 3:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

I hope Sen. Ensign continues to oppose "comprehensive immigration reform" a/k/a mass amnesty for illegal aliens. With unemployment at a 23-year high and taxpayers stretched to the limit, amnesty is the LAST thing we need or want.

And do not be fooled by the open-borders rhetoric that since we can't "round up and deport" 12-20 million illegal aliens, we have to put them on a "path to citizenship" (i.e., amnesty).

This is a classic false choice.

There is a third way to resolve this problem without having to resort to either mass deportations or another mass amnesty.

If and when we finally start to consistently enforce our existing immigration laws and cut off the jobs, this will cause the majority of illegals to leave and return to their home countries over time.

This is the humane, cost-effective, and true middle ground way to deal with the 12-20 million illegal aliens who are currently in our country.
By beachratcarpenter

5/30/09 at 3:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

when gov. arnold ax' all the programs for the poor and low income,hopefully the illegals will move next door because because they will no longer be subsedized by the tax payers of calif. and will no longer be a cheap form of labor because they will need more money, look out Nv. when they move there, their goes the schools the hospitals english will become a second language, oh and when they dont pay there fair share of taxes,dont forget they have lots of children, think how your state budget will fair. What would you do if somebody came to your home and trashed it? You would ask them to leave. The law is the law.
By Tigerbalm

5/30/09 at 7:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

The failure of the Legalization bill of 1986 was not the legalization but the poorly thought out employer sanctions. The INS stopped trying to enforce the law because 90% of employers were in compliance.

All that employer sanctions did was create a lucrative industry of false documents. Comprehensive immigration reform includes a pathway to citizenship, secure borders, removal of impediments for U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents to reunite with family members.

It is extremely difficult to come into our country lawfully. The broken system that causes the sibling of a U.S.C. to wait 25 years to come into our country must be changed. We need a just, humane reform of our immigration laws. The repressive laws of 1996 causing much of the problem today must be reviewed and revised. This needs to be done without the rancor and the hate -filled comments on this page.
By AndiMedi

5/30/09 at 7:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

The immigrants are already here. The question is whether we want them legal, taxed, and in the system or floating outside so that employers can pay them less, cheat the immigrants and cheat everyone else.

I want them registered and in the system. So does Sen. Reid and President Obama and a lot of other leaders. The anti-immigration side has a fantasy that the immigrants here and already working and raising their families are leaving, but they aren't. Let's deal with reality and get on with it.
By Candice747

5/30/09 at 7:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

I'm so happy we're making progress on comprehensive immigration reform. It's about time. I can't understand why so many people can be so small and selfish when this is the land of opportunity. They don't realize that by spending so much focus on the border that the undocumented workers have stopped leaving because it's too hard to get out and come back in. There are millions more here than would be if the border wasn't so hard to get across for undocumented workers. Also, if we let people come here because of their economic crisis in their own country, we're doing a good deed. We need to give opportunities to the poor to work. These people are willing to work hard. I can't wait until I see our nation doing the right thing by making kind comprehensive immigration reform a reality and get all those people out of the shadows and into the real world.
By Linda_in_Vegas

5/30/09 at 8:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

They are criminals! They broke the law when they crossed the border.. Since when is it the right thing to do by rewarding people for breaking the law? What a slap in the face for all the immigrants that have come here LEGALLY, that worked hard and used all the legal procedures. BTW, it isn't just illegals that can cross a lax border, but terrorists as well..
By OliverC

5/30/09 at 9:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

dave wrote:
"Thank you for this article. We do in fact NEED Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR). It's not amnesty. It would include fines for people to pay and make amends. CIR would not be just enforcing laws, but would include getting rid of the backlog of immigrants already waiting to become residents. How realistic is it to deport 12 million people?"

Laughing here!

CIR is amnesty!!! It is a path to citizenship for people who broke the law to enter the United States!!! So is the Dream Act and AgJobs.

What about the criminal aliens, here by the thousands and thousands. Let's legalize them now!

Ever heard of attrition through enforcement??? That is enforcing immigration law! Works every time it is tried.

Our immigration system is broken because it is based on chain migration instead of what is good and needed by our country! In other words, foreign nationals are determining who becomes American citizens. Thanks to Ted Kennedy in the 1960's!

Illegal aliens are a drain on taxpayers and America's jobless especially in this economy. And, they have no allegiance to the United States or the Constitution. Good bye America!
By FATEHGARHIA

5/31/09 at 12:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

IN GOD WE TRUST THATS WHAT WE FOLLOW IF WE HAVE BETTER ABILITY TO DO ANY JOB WHY WE SCARE ACCEPT THE CHALENGE AND DO OUR JOB HONESTLY.THE ERROR IS HUMAN IF U MAKE MISTAKE TO MAKE YOUR FAMILY'S LIFE GOOD.IF YOUR KIDS DYING BECAUSE U CAN'T FEED THEM WHAT U DO.DON'T BE MEAN JUST BECAUSE U BORN IN USA.THINK IF U BORN IN INDIA'POVERTY LIKE SLUMDOG.NOBODY WANNA LIVE FAR FROM THE FAMILY BUT THERE IS SOMETHING U GOTTA UNDERSTAND THAT SOMETHING IF U DON'T UNDERSTAND JUST KEEP QUITE AND DO YOUR JOB.LET THE OTHER PEOPLE DO THEIR JOBS
By PatriciaLV

5/31/09 at 5:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

Yes, they are called "illegals" for a reason. So I pose the following to all of you who are going on about "criminals" and "illegals" and "breaking the law":

Post your detailed plans for rounding up, processing and deporting 11+ million illegals with current resources.

Before you post please try to remember that you are, almost to a "man", the same group of people who always screech about "taxes". And then look up the funding for ICE.

And THEN post your detailed plans.

Seriously. You can whine, moan, bitch and complain all you want, but let's hear some workable, plausible solutions.

BTW, it wasn't "Ted Kennedy" who was solely responsible for this (I assume that is the most recent right wing/RNC/AM radio talking point as this is the third time in the third different place I've seen it). Look no further than the one I presume is your hero ..... the former Governor of California, Ronald Reagan. (Please note the use of the word GOVERNOR as it is vital in understanding WHEN the real influx of illegal Mexicans began. It wasn't in the 1960s and it wasn't in the 1980s and it wasn't under Clinton.) As to the 1986 law passed by a Democratic congress and then signed into law by then president Ronald Reagan, it was never enforced because it was never funded. Really; if you're going to spew talking points at least do some research on your own before you do.

One last thing: Just so you don't come back with some well-thought-out response such as "YOU'RE A LEFT-WING APPEASER!", try to understand that I, like you, am kind of tired of paying for people who can, but don't, pay their fair share. Unlike you, however, my ire in this area includes not only illegals (who, in comparison to the rest, cost us relatively little), but also big businesses, wealthy tax cheats, etc.
By GunslingerA10

5/31/09 at 7:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

There are many divergent points of view on immigration, like the multi color fabric of the country, not any one view is more correct than any other. Just as in the past eras there were varied points of view in America which included "Go West Young Man", Manifest Destiny, and the out right move to secede, which gave the impetus for pro slavery views to take Texas and make it another slavery state.

It was the Slave owners who used the technique to pit one another slave upon each other to help control them like cattle. In today's world we see the same thing all over again, just the issues have changed but the technique remains in place to control the masses. One ethnic group is pitted against another, one job/career field against another, with the purpose of maintaining the masses in poverty while the elite educated/wealthy continue to prosper on the backs of the under educated poor.

Texas or the entire west coast of America would not be as it is today if not for Pres. Polk's desire to steal (land grab) the entire west. Which, by the way had many unannounced riches known by the eastern part of America at the time, although, some folks will say this is not about that, on the contrary, it is, that is how Mexico lost the west in the first place. Let us not forget history, or we are destine to relive it.

America right or wrong is a nation of laws, and to those folks, who are here illegally, you are breaking the law, no different than any other law of the land, like it or not it is the law and there are consciences for not abiding by the laws of this country. Those who choose to break the laws, you will be held accountable by our judicial branch of govt. and should the law require fines, tariffs, or taxes so be it. No one is above the law, if someone commits a serious crime it's off to the poky for them. America will set the proper level of restitution for crimes against her.

For the unscrupulous business owners or managers that usurp the employment laws, time is on your side, but the long arm of the law awaits you for your unethical practices and treatment of desperate immigrants seeking a better life. The exploitive practices of yester-year are gone; I support harsh penalties for that behavior. Employment should be a legitimate avenue for legal citizens to prosper in the land, either everyone moves forward or we all fail. No child left behind, no citizen left behind; no excuses. E-Verify
By Linda_in_Vegas

5/31/09 at 8:42 a.m.

Suggest removal

Gunslinger: Absolutely an excellent post, showing all sides to the situation!!!
By AndiMedi

5/31/09 at 9:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

So the real question, then, is how many U.S. born or naturalized citizens are we willing to prevent from working legally through blunt instruments like E-verify -- which does not do a good job of preventing illegal workers from working but does do a good job of preventing people whose data in messed up in a government data base from working? Five percent? Ten percent of US born or naturalized citizens? You? Me?

Or we could go with the principle that those who have broken the law should make amends, pay a fine, go through a process of restititution and then we all move on.

That is what President Obama and Sen. Reid support in terms of getting immigrants here illegally registered and into the system and I agree.

If immigrants here illegally haven't left yet with the worst economy in memory, they aren't going to. Most have been here more than 8 years and almost half (47%) live in 2 parent families with children. They are here for good.

Whether through mass deportation or just waiting them out, the majority of undocumented immigrants are not leaving. Get over it.

Any plan that includes getting rid of 12,000,000 people is off the table. All those who vote for that approach on this board or anywhere else, please stand off to the side so the rest of us can deal with reality.
By postk49

5/31/09 at 11:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

The unions and illegal immigrants have helped ruin the country and our companies like GM. I always make it a point to tip more at non-umion casinos than at union casinos. I look to buy non-union goods any chance I get. Repeal of the Davis-Bacon act which on a national scale removes competitive bidding for wages on federal contracts would save millions every year.
By taisou108

5/31/09 at 12:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

All I'm saying is this: I'm sick and tired of hearing people say illegal immigrants take American jobs. The truth is many Americans wouldn't even "lower" themselves to do half of the jobs illegal immigrants do. If this were true, you'd see at least ONE American SOMEWHERE doing a job similar.

Then I keep hearing about how illegal immigrants drive down wages but rarely do I hear people go after the big businesses who cater to and specifically target employing them. Why is that? Is it because big businesses, at least, are American like us? Is it Us vs. Them mentality? Blame the migrant worker but not the Americans who exploit them.

By saying "illegal immigrants" I imagine most of you are really talking about Hispanic illegal immigrants since, according to many comments, Mexico gets mentioned a lot. The truth is this: on my way to work everyday I drive by caucasians on Eastern toting signs that read "Need money. God bless" all the time instead of looking for a damn job. I still have to yet to see a Hispanic do this. I have seen them selling oranges or roses near the freeway, or in front of Home Depots or Lowe's (at least) offering their services to work and EARN their money like a real American would... or perhaps SHOULD.

This has always left a profound impression on me.
By brandoneastcoast

5/31/09 at 1:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

I am sick and tried of people coming here stealing peoples ss numbers all they do in mexico is tech these people to lie and then when they are here they don't want to learn english or even be a part of are counrty they don't want to asimalate some can't even tell the time on a clock if you can't or don't want to learn english take your spanish speaking self back home and yes put your turn single on when you drive yes I said what other people are afaid to think and yes i have done low paying jobs these people have and are taking away from us if you did not come here with out lieing go home lieres its a bunch of lies lies and more lies
By geenab65

5/31/09 at 1:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Gunslinger,
You seem to be the only intelligent post here on immigration. If the jobs aren't made available by those choosing to skirt the system, then illegal immigration wouldn't be an issue.
By friday

5/31/09 at 2:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Let's not forget how many crimes can be attributed to illegals that "fly under the radar" so much of the time. Our government should not even begin to consider documenting anyone without a mandatory check of their DNA against the unsolved crimes databases. I know the libs will hate the idea, but if they've already committed the crime of illegal entry, let's make sure there's not more violent crimes these people are guilty of.
By Tigerbalm

5/31/09 at 7:07 p.m.

Suggest removal

If you want to call Comprehensive Immigration Reform amnesty so be it. What is wrong with amnesty? Amnesty is NOT a four letter word. The 1986 Act gave 3 M plus people permanent resident status including Michael J. Fox the actor who is now a champion for a cure for Parkinson disease. Most of the people who applied later became citizens, homeowners and have sent their children to college and they have sought the American Dream. Nothing was given to them they had to earn legalization or AMNESTY as some of you try to call it.

First they had to prove they were persons of good moral character. Secondly they had to prove with objective documentation the requisite time being here, third they could not otherwise be ineligible for entry into the United States i.e. no prostitutes, communists, terrorists, Nazis, polygamists need apply. Then they were given a temporary card. After a year and a half they then could apply for a permanent card but not before they then again proved that there was no criminal convictions in between when they first applied for the temporary card and they applied for the permanent card. They also had to pass an exam in English about the history and civics of the United States or take English classes. If you did not apply for the permanent card within the year and a 1/2 after getting the temporary card you lost your chance to become a permanent resident.

It is only fair and just to take people out of the shadows. The U.S. through it's trade policies specifically NAFTA has contributed to people having to come here.

People are crying about 9% unemployment here. It's as high as 25% in some areas of Mexico. By taking people out of the shadows wages will rise for everyone. As to crime, it is a myth that the undocumented contribute to a higher crime rate. This is the Lou Dobbs shortsighted mindless analysis. It makes for tantalizing sound bites but just like most of what Lou Dobbs says it's a lie. Someone in the shadows does everything to keep in the shadows. Studies show that the undocumented have the lowest crime rate of any group.

There a few bad apples in any group but you can't make the case that the undocumented have a higher crime rate. No REPUTABLE researcher has established that.

Some people on this blog seem to be filled with a hate for the undocumented to them I say: 1 John 4: 19-21
Anyone who says, 'I love God,' and hates his brother,
is a liar, since a man who does not love the brother that
he can see cannot love God, whom he has never seen.
So this is the commandment that he has given us,
that anyone who loves God must also love his brother." Matthew 25: 37-40
"I was a stranger and you made
me welcome
. . . I tell you solemnly, in so far as you did this to one of
the least of these brothers of mine, you did it to me." The undocumented are your brothers what you do unto them you do unto Christ.
By llanquihue

5/31/09 at 8:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

"Immigration, Ramirez said, is a litmus test for Hispanic voters -- if they think a candidate, or party, is hostile on the issue, they will show less interest in the candidate's or party's overall platform."

Would someone explain what stake American citizens of Hispanic descent have in granting amnesty to Hispanic illegal immigrants. Ethnic minorities have established the tribal mentality and there is no changing that. Siding with illegal aliens and the negative net benefit they bring to the U.S. says volumes about what those American hispanics really want to occur in the U.S.
By friday

5/31/09 at 9:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Tigerbalm, it's a very nice sentiment that you posted, I wish this could be that easy of a decision. If you have ever lived in San Diego, Los Angeles, Texas, New Mexico you would realize that you are very mistaken on the crime rate. Until our borders are secure, nothing will stop people from manipulating our borders, running back and forth each day, selling drugs, gang banging, and more. Why don't you go take the "immigrant trail" from Mexico into the United States; make sure to take note of the garbage, refuse, and don't miss the famous "Rape Tree." American cattle are being poisoned and injured by the garbage and bottles left by these "brothers" of yours while they pass through private property. This is a daily problem that Americans all along the border are facing. Where is your outrage for citizens that are having their land defiled and ruined by this constant stream of invaders. How would you propose solving this problem. My belief is that amnesty will never be the answer unless and until we have a secure border, and our private property is not used as a revolving door for illegals.
By moeza

5/31/09 at 11:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

The American Government let the Illegals in America and now the Government is giving the Illegals our American jobs. America's Government is deceiving their own Country. If we gave each American Citizen the illegal's job, each American would have a job. Look around, the illegals have our jobs now and the illegals will continue to take the Americans jobs.

We as American Citizens all agree what is right and what we should do. When do the American Citizens start fighting back for our Country?

Bye Bye U.S.A
By melena29

6/1/09 at 10:04 a.m.

Suggest removal

For those of you who insist the illegals can't be deported...

Back during The Great Depression, President Herbert Hoover ordered the deportation of ALL illegal aliens in order to make jobs available to American citizens that desperately needed work.

Harry Truman deported over two million Illegal's after WWII to create jobs for returning veterans.

And then again in 1954, President Dwight Eisenhower deported 13 million Mexican Nationals! The program was called 'Operation Wetback'. It was done so WWII and Korean Veterans would have a better chance at jobs. It took 2 Years, but they deported them!

Now...if they could deport the illegal's back then - they could sure do it today?

lf you have doubts about the veracity of this information, enter Operation Wetback into your favorite search engine and confirm it for yourself.
By melena29

6/1/09 at 10:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

Tigerbalm, as long as we're quoting scriptures...

He who troubles his own house shall inherit the wind, and the fool shall be servant to the wise-hearted.
By Ali999

6/1/09 at 11:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

1. The Dream Act does not grant citizenship to undocumented individuals.
----No, it gives them conditional permanent residency in this country and eventually, permanent residency, after which they may apply for citizenship. In the meantime, however, they'd be able to receive state and federal funds and loans for college and to work. Eventually, they would be able to sponsor their family members, including those who DID bring them here illegally, for permanent residency here. The documents showing that these "children" came here before age 16 are easily counterfeited and you can bet there'd be a cottage industry in doing just that. Furthermore, do we really believe that there will EVER be any serious efforts to remove those who do NOT qualify for legal permanent residency, especially AFTER they've gotten a Social Security number?

2. Not everyone who came into the United States through Ellis Island entered the United States as legal entrants. Many were W.O.P.S.,Without Papers similar to the undocumented of our day. These W.O.P.S. included English, Irish, Italians, Swedes, etc.

---------At least they ENTERED legally. Having "papers" really doesn't mean much either when there was no way to check them or when you change people's names anyway.

3.It is a lie that the undocumented take away jobs and specifically from Black people. ---You mean the same Immigration Policy Center that's the "research arm" of immigration attorneys? Pull the other one. A more biased study you couldn't find.

4. Immigration reform is needed and it is needed now. Ensign has been an anti-immigrant herald.
-----------
If ANY politician has serious political ambitions, he or she would do well to remember that MOST Americans are not Hispanic and that even many Hispanics do not support amnesty. Why should they? Blue collar workers such as my Hispanic nephew have been and will be seriously harmed by illegal aliens of whatever country.

5. There has never been an amnesty in this country. Every legalization plan (1952, 1986) had requirements ...Many of those people later became productive, hard working citizens who pursued the American Dream including an aide to John Ensign.
----Amnesty is by definition, the forgiveness of a wrong. Attaching requirements to that doesn't change the fact that the wrong was committed in the first place or that it's being "forgiven". Many of those following the 1986 amnesty have NOT become productive or citizens. The rates of welfare use among Hispanics rose after the 1986 amnesty and are rising now, especially for Hispanic children living in poverty. Many Hispanics only became citizens the past couple of years when threatened with the loss of social services and welfare benefits. (Naturalization rates have historically been especially low among Mexicans.)
Nor would legalization change poverty, except to make legalized illegal aliens able to access welfare programs they can't now get.
By Ali999

6/1/09 at 11:41 a.m.

Suggest removal

Tigerbalm wrote:"People are crying about 9% unemployment here. It's as high as 25% in some areas of Mexico. By taking people out of the shadows wages will rise for everyone. As to crime, it is a myth that the undocumented contribute to a higher crime rate. This is the Lou Dobbs shortsighted mindless analysis. It makes for tantalizing sound bites but just like most of what Lou Dobbs says it's a lie. Someone in the shadows does everything to keep in the shadows. Studies show that the undocumented have the lowest crime rate of any group."

--------
Tigerbalm, it's the SHEER numbers of illegal aliens that keep wages down, that and the fact that they're unskilled and uneducated so have no basis for differentiating themselves from other workers and getting higher wages. Just like in Mexico. For that matter, consider: illegal aliens are often using either a stolen or fraudulent ID, so are to all intents and purposes, being treated the same way as an American would be. Yet, employers still don't raise wages. If employers KNOW that they're hiring illegal aliens, and keep wages low because they know, what makes you think they won't continue to hire illegals AFTER an amnesty?

As for crime by illegal aliens, no matter the number, it sure ranks right up there for seriousness. Four Hispanics, including two foreign nationals (illegal aliens) are on the FBI's 10 Most Wanted List, right up there with Osama bin Laden.
By Ali999

6/1/09 at 11:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

Tigerbalm wrote:"It is extremely difficult to come into our country lawfully. The broken system that causes the sibling of a U.S.C. to wait 25 years to come into our country must be changed. We need a just, humane reform of our immigration laws. The repressive laws of 1996 causing much of the problem today must be reviewed and revised. This needs to be done without the rancor and the hate -filled comments on this page.
--------
It's so "difficult" to immigrate to our country legally that more than one MILLION manage to do it each year. 15-20% of those are from one country, MEXICO, because of family reunification, and has been so for decades. That there's a long wait for some countries is simply because there are SO MANY IMMIGRANTS ALREADY from those countries trying to sponsor yet more (extended) relatives, such as brothers and sisters and their families. Roughly 50% of all legal immigration is from Latin America. If anything, Hispanic immigrants are OVERREPRESENTED in our legal immigration and should be cut back in number, perhaps by limiting the family categories to the nuclear family.
By Ali999

6/1/09 at 11:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

taisou108 wrote:"All I'm saying is this: I'm sick and tired of hearing people say illegal immigrants take American jobs. The truth is many Americans wouldn't even "lower" themselves to do half of the jobs illegal immigrants do. If this were true, you'd see at least ONE American SOMEWHERE doing a job similar."
--------
Funny, but Tyson's and other companies that have been raided haven't had problems finding legal workers (including LEGAL immigrants) to do those dirty jobs AT HIGHER WAGES.

You'll see plenty of Americans doing dirty jobs themselves. My brother mows and does his own yard work. Another worked construction (a job SITLL typically done by Americans, according to the Pew Hispanic Center, although illegal aliens are now about 25% of the workers). My nieces have done child care and worked in restaurants.
For that matter, people have their own gardens these days. One enterprising household I passed the other day has a large strawberry patch and a "pick your own" sign.
By Guardian

6/1/09 at 11:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

Tigerbalm says, "Some people on this blog seem to be filled with a hate for the undocumented to them I say: 1 John 4: 19-21 Anyone who says, 'I love God,' and hates his brother,
is a liar, since a man who does not love the brother that
he can see cannot love God, whom he has never seen. So this is the commandment that he has given us, that anyone who loves God must also love his brother." Matthew 25: 37-40
"I was a stranger and you made me welcome . . . I tell you solemnly, in so far as you did this to one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did it to me." The undocumented are your brothers what you do unto them you do unto Christ."

I believe that Christ's teachings were meant for ALL of us, including the illegal aliens in our midst, not just American citizens. Thus, according to Christ's own teachings Tigerbalm's "undocumented" are violating Christ's laws when they steal our identities, jobs, social benefits, etc. Aren't they doing this to Christ, then, as well as to us?

Christ also specifically commanded all of us never to lie or cheat or steal (among other things). Again, he meant ALL of us, not just American citizens.

Interesting how the WWJD folks are so selective in their interpretations and deliberately distort things when it comes to Jesus' teachings.

We have also been taught that the love of money is the root of all evil. If you don't think that money/greed is at the root of illegal immigration then you're terribly naive. To me, illegal immigration is evil and will have dire consequences for this country.

Tigerbalm and others like him would do well to stop demonizing their fellow citizens who are law abiding and hate the illegality of illegal immigration but support lawful and orderly immigration and immigrants. My friends and family (including some legal immigrants) are among the kindest, most honest, most generous, hard-working and truly wonderful people in the world. All are against illegal immigration and rewarding illegality in any way.

This includes the unscrupulous employers who are at the root of the problem. Those employers certainly expect all of us to be honest in our dealings with them. It's time they became honest themselves. I liken them (and everyone who supports this) to the money changers Christ chased out of the temple.

I personally want to see honesty and integrity prevail rather than greed.
By Ali999

6/1/09 at 12:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

Tigerbalm, if you knew anything about analyzing research, you'd know one of the FIRST steps is to look at the biases of the researchers and those sponsoring the research. Now, the Immigration Policy Center is the "research arm" (according to their website) of a group of immigration lawyers. That alone should tell you that this "study" wouldn't see the light of day if it didn't support the lawyers' livelihood, immigration. Check out some the academic studies done at places such Georgetown, Northeastern University, Cornell (Vernon Briggs), or Harvard (George Borjas) if you really want to find out the economic impact of illegal aliens. Even LEGAL immigrants, in a prominent study done in the 1990s, have a TRIVIAL impact on the U.S. economy.
By airweare

6/1/09 at 2:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

All native Americans can stay.

The rest of you invaders are no longer welcome on turtle island. Go home.
By Smendy

6/1/09 at 4:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

McCain is either clueless or a classic Democrat, pretending to be a conservitive. For years he bent over backwards for illegal aliens in order to impress "hispanic voters" and he still got trounced in the recent presidential election!

I guess he feels Republicans didn't go far enough? Maybe Americans should hand over our car keys and houses to illegal aliens? That should be enough to expand the GOP tent, right Senator McCain?

P.S: Looks like California is being brought to it's knees by illegals aliens.

http://americanpatrol.com/REFERENCE/CalM...
By melena29

6/2/09 at 6:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

Airweare

According to recorded history, there are no people indigenous to this part of North America. Since there was no established government and there were no laws in place when the Europeans settled this country, then no government was overthrown and no laws were broken.

Much of the land was obtained legally through a series of treaties - treaties that tribal councils read, discussed for several days ahead of time, and ultimately agreed to of their own free will and over the course of decades. Money and goods were exchanged for the land. Often, in the spirit of goodwill and to compensate for any cultural misunderstandings, the colonists would pay the children and grandchildren of the original Indian diplomats more money and goods for the land sold over a generation earlier, even though the original contract had long since been fulfilled. And these later generations again agreed the land legally belonged to the colonies.

Most of the animosity that resulted from American Indians originated in the tensions between tribal elders and the tribal members these elders represented. The elders oversaw the treaties and profited most directly from the sale of land; some others in the tribe felt their leaders had sold them out for personal greed. Many Indians began to lash out at the settlers that began migrating to the newly purchased land, fostering mutual enmity.

Muddying the waters further, various tribes would sell territories other tribes also claimed as their own. But the infighting, betrayals, and backbiting among the various tribes doesn't fit neatly into the "evil European" storyline, naturally, so it is ignored.

What cemented the bad relations between the American Indian and the colonies was the American Revolution. The largest tribes fought on the side of the English against the Americans. When England lost, the tribes and their member nations had long since turned their backs on the possibility of friendship. Again, thought out actions made ahead of time by the Indian leadership.

The historical reality is in no way as simple as you wish it was. If nothing else, it is a parable for how badly things can go for a people if their leaders sell out their constituents.
By melena29

6/2/09 at 6:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

Airweare

When Europeans came here, it was not a separate and sovereign nation with immigration laws, as it is now. There was still plenty of land and resources, without risk that the land and resources would be overpopulated and resources depleted, as this country is now. Europeans did not come here lured by a welfare state, ethnocentric special interest groups only wanting to increase their own relevance and power, and they did not claim "victimhood" and special treatment based on their race, as illegal alien groups do now.

Funny how this claim of outrage about Europeans and Native Americans has only been expressed in recent years by some illegal aliens. The Europeans came to America centuries ago! Where was the outrage before? If illegal aliens are really angry about the Europeans coming to America, then they should go back to their own countries and express this anger. Your claims hold no water when you are here, illegally invading and violating the immigration laws of a sovereign nation, while claiming to be angry about Europeans.

Interesting how you all waited until the house was built, the infrastructure was in place, and the economy was thriving before you all crashed the gate. Where were you when the hard work was being done?

And by the way, unless you are making the "Europeans are the illegals" argument for the sole purpose of giving it all back to the "Native Americans", you are but a self-serving, law-breaking, illegal alien leach (or one of the scum sucking pieces of dung that employ them), and you really don't give a damn about anything other than what you can get, and how can you get it, and for the least amount of effort and cost to yourself.

It wasn't until the arrival of all these foreign workers (both illegal and via the visa program) that this began to come apart. Present circumstances bear that out, because if any of them were worth a fraction of what they think they're worth, the hell hole they've come from wouldn't be a hell hole now, would it?
By LV4LIFE

6/2/09 at noon

Suggest removal

Airweare,

There are several tribes of indians who would disagree with your "no indigenous people" statement. School much?
By melena29

6/2/09 at 12:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

LV4LIFE

Are you addressing me? School lots, thank you.

Several groups of illegals are having the same problem, re: "disagreeing" with the truth.

Do some research.
By GunslingerA10

6/2/09 at 2:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

melena29:

Very well said, I just have some odd feelings about some of your overwhelming understandings of what is what, or the veracity of accounts.

You state historical accounts of the victors as hard and fast, when we all know that past historical accounts are suspect, and perspective. To the victor go the spoils, right or wrong that is a fact, and that supports the fact that history is not a concrete account of events or truthful contracts/treaties.

There where many people living in North America and speaking over 100 languages, we the USA have killed all those nations (savages) for our own profit, when the Europeans invaded, fact, the choice not to recognize those savages as people supports the invaders point that it was open land. The narrowness (prejudice) of the invaders was that there was no recognized government (Indian Nation) that spoke a European language, so by those rules anything goes. If we used those same ideas/rules today then any nation who uses a different language is entitled to invade another, wait, isn't that what we did in Iraq. I guess it will be history some 100 years from now that the USA invasion of Iraq was warranted because of Weapons of Mass Destruction (UMD), this of course is a well known fact not to be true today.

I don't want to shade all that you wrote, some of it has merit, but for the most part it is a very gray shade. I still find it interesting that Gen Custard was a hero in his time, but you know better, don't you.

I wonder why there where treaties, can you explain. The treaties were created after the invaders annihilated the so called savages into submission, and were forced into putting their mark or face extinction. Once the savages signed, it was off to the reservation for their safe keeping, oh, and when gold was found in the black hills, the USA arbitrarily moved the savages from that reservation we gave them in the treaty, and yes it is only now that Native Americans are reaping rewards from what little they have left on their reservations, not because of the invaders, but because they now have learned the invaders tactics and methods of deception. Do you recall when the first casinos where being built on reservations, what an out cry and all the hindrances from the invaders, today many of those tribes are very wealthy. I could go on, but you will still not recognize the facts of what the invaders did, or are still doing in North America, believe me, I am one of them, I used to work for the government.

Why was Geronimo (Hermano) assonated? Can I help; he wouldn't sign the paper. Not one grain!

It would serve people to know the real truths of history, but it is all based on who gets to write it and say what they will of the events for their own gains, which you and I both know are not even accurate.
By GunslingerA10

6/2/09 at 2:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

By the way, I am not an illegal alien but a US citizen, capable of seeing the broad spectrum, not just what is mainstream, or that of the majority. The USA would have been a hell hole long before were it not for its diversity and immigrants who have come with new paradigms to create a better place for all of us to enjoy and create the melting pot it is today. It wasn't until the later part of the 1820's that the number of immigrants per year was over 10,000, and from that time on, the numbers kept growing. The first real bursts in immigration came in the 1840's and 1850's, when poor harvests forced people to leave Great Britain and Northern Europe. Most of them came to the United States in order to survive -- there simply wasn't enough food to support the population. So, between 1845 and 1860, more than 3.5 million people (invaders) arrived in the United States in search of a better life.
In the early years, the influx of immigrants was tolerated, if not altogether welcomed. Immigrants helped populate the growing country, and a majority of them were English-speaking invading Protestants, so they blended in well with the rest of the invaders.

However, as more and more Irish and European Catholics entered the United States, previous immigrant Americans began to protest. They feared both cheap labor and the possibility that a large Catholic population would increase the influence of the Pope in the United States. This fear spawned the "Know-Nothing" movement, a group of individuals who wanted stricter controls on immigration and naturalization.
By 1870, roughly one-eighth of the population was foreign-born. So, the U.S. government passed laws to regulate immigration. For example, in 1882, the Chinese Exclusion Act disallowed entry of all working-class Chinese. Later laws also barred people who had no money, individuals with certain diseases, anarchists, and individuals who were deemed insane.
By GunslingerA10

6/2/09 at 2:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

The US govt. set up quota systems with the National Origins Acts in the 1920's. These quotas heavily favored British and Northern European immigrants over those from Southern and Eastern Europe. At the time, Americans were more accepting of the British and Northern Europeans, while the cultures and cheap labor offered by Slavs, Greeks, Italians, and other Southern and Eastern Europeans seemed more threatening. In response to growing public opinion against the flow of immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe in the years following World War I, Congress passed first the Quota Act of 1921 then the even more restrictive Immigration Act of 1924 (the Johnson-Reed Act). Initially, the 1924 law imposed a total quota on immigration of 165,000--less than 20 percent of the pre-World War I average. It based ceilings on the number of immigrants from any particular nation on the percentage of each nationality recorded in the 1890 census--a blatant effort to limit immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe, which mostly occurred after that date. In the first decade of the 20th century, an average of 200,000 Italians had entered the United States each year. With the 1924 Act, the annual quota for Italians was set at less than 4,000.
These quotas remained in effect until 1965, when the government adjusted them to allow for even more immigration from all countries into the United States. Now, even those quotas are slightly more relaxed. In the post-World War II era, the U.S. government has made exceptions to the quota rules when political situations in other countries such as Cambodia, Vietnam, and Cuba have made it necessary.
By GunslingerA10

6/2/09 at 2:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

National Origin Immigration Quotas:
Afghanistan (100) Albania (1000) Andorra (100) Arabian peninsula (except Muscat, Aden Settlement and Protectorate, and Saudi Arabia; 100) Australia (including Tasmania, Papua, and all islands appertaining to Australia; 100) Belgium (1,304) Bhutan (100) Bulgaria (100) Cameroons (British mandate; 100) Cameroun (French mandate; 100) China (100) Czechoslovakia (2,874) Danzig, Free City of (100) Denmark (1,181) Egypt (100) Estonia (116) Ethiopia (Abyssinia; 100) Finland (569) France (3,086) Germany (27,370) Great Britain and Northern Ireland (65,721) Greece (307) Hungary (869) Iceland (100) India (100) Iran (100) Iraq (100) Ireland (Eire; 17,853) Italy (5,802) Japan (100) Latvia (236) Liberia (100) Liechtenstein (100) Lithuania (386) Luxemburg (100) Monaco (100) Morocco (French and Spanish zones and Tangier; 100) Muscat (Oman; 100) Nauru (British mandate; 100) Nepal (100) Netherlands (3,153) New Guinea, Territory of (including appertaining islands; Australian mandate; 100) New Zealand (100) Norway (2,377) Palestine (with Trans-Jordan; British mandate; 100) Poland (6,524) Portugal (440) Ruanda and Urundi (Belgian mandate; 100) Rumania (377) Samoa, Western (mandate of New Zealand; 100) San Marino (100) Saudi Arabia (100) Siam (100) South Africa, Union of (100) South-West Africa (mandate of the Union of South Africa; 100) Spain (252) Sweden (3,314) Switzerland (1,707) Syria and the Lebanon (French mandate; 123)Tanganyika Territory (British mandate; 100) Togoland (British mandate; 100) Togoland (French mandate; 100) Turkey (226) Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (2,712) Yap and other Pacific islands under Japanese mandate (100) Yugoslavia (845)

Notice, there are no limits to Canada, or Mexico. As for Mexico, it has to do with the treaty of Hidalgo, but it is better to just say limit them anyway. The way to do it is by not having enough turnstiles to meet the flow of immigrants, both into or out of the USA. Where there more turnstiles, a marked decrease in illegal immigration would appear, but it makes better politics to arouse the ignorance of Americans into thinking the problem can be solved by putting up this wall. "Berlin Tear Down This Wall" Don't misunderstand, I believe in boarder security, just not the foolhardy wasted money on the wall which is being put up now.
By fremmasmind

6/3/09 at 3:42 a.m.

Suggest removal

For you people who are stupid enough to want immigration reform in favor of the illegals, just remember, for every immigrant we let in they can bring in all family members by green card through family member. Every child brought in through the Dream Act '09, 10 to 20 family members will be brought in. I don't think the U.S. needs 20 to 40 million more immigrants brought into our country, ever. We have enough problems trying to get our elected officials to do their job.
AMERICA, where are you now, don't you care about your sons and daughters? Don't you know we need you now, we can't fight alone against the monster.
By melena29

6/3/09 at 6:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

GunslingerA10:

Wow! Thank you for enlightening me. I really mean that, and will do further research on my own, but for the purpose of our current circumstance I'll address the following on this board:

You wrote: "Notice, there are no limits to Canada, or Mexico. As for Mexico, it has to do with the treaty of Hidalgo, but it is better to just say limit them anyway. The way to do it is by not having enough turnstiles to meet the flow of immigrants, both into or out of the USA. Where there more turnstiles, a marked decrease in illegal immigration would appear, but it makes better politics to arouse the ignorance of Americans into thinking the problem can be solved by putting up this wall. "Berlin Tear Down This Wall" Don't misunderstand, I believe in boarder security, just not the foolhardy wasted money on the wall which is being put up now."

Regarding the number of turnstiles, perhaps therein lay the crux of the problem.

It seems to me (and to most Americans) that the immigration opportunity is a one way street. There is tremendous opportunity for immigrants coming into America, but practically none for Americans who are being callously displaced by excessive,
out-of-control immigration, and who have nowhere to go. Few nations offer comparable opportunities to those here in the USA, and those that do will not accept a comparable share of immigrants from outside their borders to help offset population displacement (mostly due to immigration) in other lands.

Unless the scales are balanced across the board to provide for "equal opportunity" worldwide, then the gains of immigrants coming to America are at the expense of Americans, and this is simply unacceptable. The current economic meltdown bears that out. I know, its all about mortgages and credit, but not really. It's about greed. I refer to the kind of greed that compensates CEO's at obscene multi-million dollar rates, while the labor force which enables their profits can barely keep its collective head above water. Unless people can afford to buy homes and pay their credit card bills, who will buy all the homes and goods necessary to stimulate the economy? The elite who created this mess? Perhaps that's the plan after all. It's all for them, and none for everyone else. Oh, pardon me. That's the La Raza mission statement. My bad.

Perhaps this "world economy" was supposed to correct the above mentioned imbalance. They who thought that it could are fools, because in order for that to happen, the entire world would have to adopt an economic paradigm that would provide for all the worlds citizens in the same manner that America's economic paradigm used to provide its people. You and I both know that that is not now, never has been, and never will be the intent or purpose of a world economy.
By cambridge

6/3/09 at 6:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

1/3 of students are or from illegals. we talk about budgets yet these people dont pay into the system. the same goes for our health system, they dont pay the bills. these people go commit crimes leave nice finger prints for the cops and guess what.....they are not on record and go free! here is a traffic ticket jaun sanchez, the next day jaun is now segio. i wish i got such freedoms of taxes, bills and other things they exploit. i dont care who ro where they are from but at least play by the rules of the community and yes it would be nice if they learned english. what is most amazing that if u call the police they will say "sorry we dont enforce the laws on the general laborers" on the street corners! i bet my paycheck that if u put a group of black men, skate borders, skin heads, jews, guys with prair mats or any other ethnic or stereotypical group and the cops would be down there getting interviews. They call those other groups gangs but the mexicans are ok because it politically wrong, what a joke
By melena29

6/3/09 at 6:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

So, on this as on many other boards, Americans are chided for defending themselves. We are called racists even as race has nothing to do with our argument; we are called xenophobes, even as fear takes no place in this equation; we are called selfish as we work to protect and defend that for which our immigrant ancestors sacrificed all that was dear to them in order to provide for their progeny (we are truly following their worthy example, you see), and we are called prideful because we expect current immigrants to honor our immigrant ancestors as we do, and demand they follow in their noble footsteps. (This is after all, the price of America).

Consider the very real probability that when Americans win this battle (and I have every reason to believe that we will), the after effect may very well be a better quality of life for people everywhere, because once they have failed at this attempt at personal gain at America's expense, they will be forced to fight for themselves and their progeny in their homelands.
By melena29

6/3/09 at 7:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

GunslingerA10,

With regard to the "quotas" you mention, does it seem just a bit unbalanced and unfair to anyone other than me that America is expected to "balance" her population to provide for diversity and to reflect the world's population, but no other nation is held to such ridiculous expectations? Yes, I said ridiculous.

I'd like to see the Middle East open it borders to people from other lands, and who practice other religions. That would certainly go a long way to creating good-will and understand with regard to the Muslim community, don't you think?

It just seems to me that the people who built the house ought to have the most say as to who lives in it. As American stands now, she was built primarily by Americans of European and African descent.
By melena29

6/3/09 at 7:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

As you so eloquently stated, Gunslinger10A:

"You state historical accounts of the victors as hard and fast, when we all know that past historical accounts are suspect, and perspective."

How right you are. So let's just deal with the here and now which we can affirm; let's enforce the laws of the land, and let us not reward those who have shat upon our nation.

"To the victor go the spoils, right or wrong that is a fact, and that supports the fact that history is not a concrete account of events or truthful contracts/treaties".

This is quite a paradox, isn't it? And since veracity of this axiom is the driving force behind the illegal interloper's conscious decision to deliberately disobey our laws, it would behoove us to do everything in our power to derail them. After all, those who do not learn from history are certainly doomed to repeat it.
By LV4LIFE

6/3/09 at 9:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

No melena29 I wasn't talking to you.
By GunslingerA10

6/5/09 at 12:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

melena29:

What a beautiful song you sing, it makes me feel warm inside to know you delight in our discourse. I am in agreement with most of your dialog, as you acknowledge my crux to the problem of illegal immigration in your first stanza.

Our legislative branch makes the laws on immigration, and while I as do you don't agree with the government quotas, they are the laws of the land we call America, home of the free, land of the brave, from sea to shinning sea. Every two years we have an opportunity to redirect the sediment in Washington visa-vi through the ballot box. We can learn to live with the laws and the direction of our country or change it, ultimately we have the freedom to return whence are ancestors came from- although I never want you to leave melena29, I need you as does our country, your drive to stir the pot brings new ideas to the surface. Unfortunately, the people who built the house are long gone, only their ideals remain, which of course is why we have the power to amend the constitution, as our fore-Fathers hoped and intended us to.

Europe and other first-world economic Nations have immigration problems too. You are correct; there are very few countries where Americans can enjoy the same rate of return for employment as those who flock from third-world economies to America do. Their only hope is to improve their faith in life and earn a livelihood. It is at our expense that these third-world country nationals (TCN's) prosper in America; there is no panacea for you or me to keep from feeling those economic pangs, but rest assured TCN's exchange their services for value. Look into the main focus of the last G-20 meeting and the driving force behind its purpose, the IMF was granted two billion for the lesser Nations in an attempt to nip the over whelming effect of this world economic tragedy, there by reducing an on slot of migration around the world as a result. E-Verify, this is a means of immunizing immigration into America as well as for the corrupt business practices that are harming her. To make employment available for the American workforce America needs tougher laws and penalties, with sharper teeth, leaved on all parties as the 1986 SIMPSON/MAZZOLI BILL is being usurped today. Contractors and employers alike involved in the exploitation of illegal/forged or un/documented employment is what we all despise and those unscrupulous (Mcabelian) opportunist must be held accountable by all levels of government, and valiant employees should have channels for identifying wayward employers, until then, we can do no more than what the pro immigration protesters do, fulfill are constitutional right to peacefully protest our government.
By GunslingerA10

6/5/09 at 1:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

Not all Nations have the same principles as America, I cringe when I hear comparisons or rationalizations, such as- why does America only have to comport itself to such a high standard, other counties don't, or why don't we as Americans impose upon other countries to act like US. There are many countries that hate what we stand for because of vile comments ("Most hispanics I come across are filthy, low class pigs. Like we need more of them coming here legally, let alone illegally"- taken from an earlier post) and subjugating views by heartless Americans of the human plight, views which are not anywhere close to the principles of which form the bedrock of our country. America is without comparison, although when large numbers of citizen's protest for reform, government will change, not necessarily for the best, it can be said, depending on which side of the aisle you stand. I have faith in mankind to do what is right thing and support the truly destitute in this life as was notes several days ago when a fire broke-out in an apartment, right here in Las Vegas, and the apartment community revealed its caring support and charity to assist their neighbors. What an epiphany that would be to see the same with our neighbors to the south.

Your Witness

« Previous Ten Next Ten »

Live chat: Tuesday, noon PST; Chat with Krista Creelman; Problem Gambling Center executive director Krista Creelman will answer questions about gambling addiction from Las Vegas Sun readers from noon to 1 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. ... Submit question