Free Flash gamesz online Visit http://www.Flashgamesz.net...

I’ve seen posts elsewhere linking this with the NAU (North American Union) and SPP (Security & Prosperity Partnership). Briefly: Globalization. Free movement of people, goods, money. A supranational ruling body. Loss of sovereignty. (”Nationalism? Patriotism? How quaint! {how archaic}.” )

I don’t know exactly how this huge super-multi-all-purpose bill forwards that agenda, but I’m not seeing any other reasonable explanations for this Congressional betrayal.

“Bush thinks we need to merge US/Can/Mx to protect ourselves against the islamic tidal wave of violence which inevitably will come…”

I don’t think it’s about security, I think it’s about competition with the EU. But look what those countries (Britain, Germany, France, Denmark, …) have to put up with, wave after wave of Somalis, Pakistanis, Albanians… Can our government not see the similarities? We will also have wave after wave from underdeveloped countries, coming to be on OUR dole! … And hollering “racist!” “bigot!” when we start complaining about the expense.

What you seem to be saying is that business is willing to spend large amounts of political capital and actual capital to lobby for this bill, so they can fire the illegal’s working for them now… just to hire new ones later. But they can do that with …. or without this bill. Doesn’t make sense.

Maxx on June 27, 2007 at 1:44 PM

You are correct. This whole thing—shamnesty, no border enforcement, no punishment for Visa over-stays, etc—does not make any sense.

Its strange that they could be so powerful yet so unknown and unseen. I appreciate your input, but I’m still far from convinced that its any association of businesses that is behind this.

Maxx on June 27, 2007 at 1:44 PM

I appreciate your good comments. I intend to keep learning from others, including yourself. To be honest with you, I am still speechless on this whole thing. Your above quote sums up everything perfectly: “Doesn’t make sense.”

The reason they are “for it” is because there is no effective border security, thus guaranteeing that millions and millions of new illegal aliens will arrive illegally across our open and porous borders in the future. Not to mention visa over-stays.

The existing employers who already hire illegal aliens will then fire their illegals-turned newly Z visa-turned eventual voting USA citizens.

Then they will just hire the new illegals, or Visa over-stays.

Remember, Amnesty has already been given 7 times SINCE 1986. The businesses know what to do. Hire illegals, then fire them when they become USA citizens, then hire more illegals

After all, our government is encouraging them to do so.

ColtsFan on June 27, 2007 at 1:20 PM

What you seem to be saying is that business is willing to spend large amounts of political capital and actual capital to lobby for this bill, so they can fire the illegal’s working for them now… just to hire new ones later. But they can do that with …. or without this bill. Doesn’t make sense.

And where and who is this well organized and cohesive group of disassociated businesses (except illegal labor) that has such sway with Congress? I’ve never heard of, or seen them before, yet they are able to make Congress and the President close their eyes to 75% of the electorate. Its strange that they could be so powerful yet so unknown and unseen. I appreciate your input, but I’m still far from convinced that its any association of businesses that is behind this.

Yes, and all of that will change under the amnesty bill, suddenly they WILL have to start paying taxes and insurance for all of those employees. So why would they be for it ? I am not convinced that business is pushing this, but that is “the story” that is being put out there.

So who is really pushing this bill?

Maxx on June 27, 2007 at 12:19 PM

The reason they are “for it” is because there is no effective border security, thus guaranteeing that millions and millions of new illegal aliens will arrive illegally across our open and porous borders in the future. Not to mention visa over-stays.

The existing employers who already hire illegal aliens will then fire their illegals-turned newly Z visa-turned eventual voting USA citizens.

Then they will just hire the new illegals, or Visa over-stays.

Remember, Amnesty has already been given 7 times SINCE 1986. The businesses know what to do. Hire illegals, then fire them when they become USA citizens, then hire more illegals

After all, our government is encouraging them to do so.

What set my hair on fire, was a illegal alien protester with a sign saying it is their land not ours. Oh, really! They made a shithole out Mexico and now they want to do it to the rest of the continent. Could they have come up with a Consitution like we have? Could they have built a country like we have? I don’ think so. Besides, I saw on TV on the history or discovery channel…that they now have proof that Europeans (from what is now France) were the first people to come to what is now America. In fact, it said the people traveled back and forth between the American and European continents, depending on the weather, ice etc.

Some companies require English-speaking employees. Unfortunately, many do not. Examples of the latter commonly include:

***agriculture
***manufacturing companies
***companies involved in distribution, transportation
***landscaping
***retail companies
***service industry

Those are just the tip of the iceberg. And companies that hire illegals know that they do not have to pay any healthcare insurance. Instead, the employer just directs the illegal alien to the nearest emergency room where they receive free healthcare, ranging from outpatient and inpatient stays.

ColtsFan on June 26, 2007 at 11:58 PM

Yes, and all of that will change under the amnesty bill, suddenly they WILL have to start paying taxes and insurance for all of those employees. So why would they be for it ? I am not convinced that business is pushing this, but that is “the story” that is being put out there.

So who is really pushing this bill ?

I keep hearing that “Big Business” is pro-amnesty bill. Tell why then do so many chemical companies and refineries require that all employees are able to read and speak English fluently, at least in this part of Louisiana. It is a safety “reason.” Now then why would they want illegals to be inside the boundary.

I realize that there are other big businesses besides refining and petrochemical but we do need to say more than “Big Business” to be accurate.

Kermit on June 26, 2007 at 10:41 PM

Excellent point.

Some companies require English-speaking employees. Unfortunately, many do not. Examples of the latter commonly include:

***agriculture
***manufacturing companies
***companies involved in distribution, transportation
***landscaping
***retail companies
***service industry

Those are just the tip of the iceberg. And companies that hire illegals know that they do not have to pay any healthcare insurance. Instead, the employer just directs the illegal alien to the nearest emergency room where they receive free healthcare, ranging from outpatient and inpatient stays.

And people wonder why Emergency Rooms are packed full (standing room only) with patients who do not even have ER type of symptoms.

This is an abuse of the system.

Dr. tells a patient that he has Alzheimer’s AND cancer. The patient responds, “Thank God I don’t have cancer!”

I realize that there are other big businesses besides refining and petrochemical but we do need to say more than “Big Business” to be accurate.

So it is within this agreement of convenience that democracy, or some close version of it, is purportedly maintained without the actual participation of the people. Some may say this is not democracy. Certainly not how the Greeks envisioned it. But for large nations, and not tiny city states, it was considered the only workable solution, a clever facsimile of democracy. At worst, a clever illusion.

However, if that trust is betrayed, or in any way misused, then you don’t even have the illusion of a democracy. It was a ruse. You have an oligarchy. One could argue that in the wake of the collective epiphany the citizens have now experienced, that the United States is essentially a de facto oligarchy, where an elite cadre of men and women rule, sometimes in accordance with the general will of the people, or sometimes in contempt of it. Either way, it is not the people exercising democracy, it is only a small group of elitists that have that privilege and when they do exercise it, they do so for their own purposes, not for their constituents.

also, Most of america wants us out of Iraq…should we leave?

1. “The U.S. Constitution, which we are sworn to uphold, doesn’t bind us as it thinks it does. We will act outside of it’s boundaries as we wish.”

2. “The people of the United States serve at our pleasure, not the other way around. Thanks in part to McCain/Feingold, incumbent entrenchment is greater than ever, so we have little reason to fear the threats of being voted out. We are the masters, they the servants.”

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.