Bush’s response to immigration question makes 13-year-old girl cry
posted at 5:30 pm on July 10, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
She must be a Republican.
“Mr. President, I know immigration has been a big problem in the U.S. And what is your next step with the immigration bill?” Jessica asked Mr. Bush, during a question and answer period after a speech Mr. Bush gave to a Cleveland business group.
Mr. Bush’s sarcastic reply — a wry “yeah, thanks” — drew laughter from the crowd of 400. But the attention caused young Jessica, who characterized herself in an interview afterward as very shy, to immediately tear up.
“No, it’s a great question. No, I appreciate that,” Mr. Bush said, as he saw Jessica’s reaction.
Jessica, in the interview, said that she was crying because she was so nervous.
But when the president’s sarcastic answer was mentioned, she said, “I heard that too.”
It’s been on my mind lately so I’m going to ask you flat out. Moment of truth. Yes or no?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Food fight!
Coronagold on July 10, 2007 at 6:38 PM
Of course, NO Amnesty!
I’m really surprised some of you agree to that. Our Healthcare and Social Security outlook for the future is already grimmish. Add to that 12+++++++ million illegals and you can forget about ever having a decent retirement.
Liberals will be taxing us out the wazoo to care for all these people who were given amnesty because they sure as hell won’t be able to take care of themselves once they are old. Think its bad now? Wait another 20 years and see the catastrophic results to our economy.
Round them all up and send them home? No need to be that drastic. If they are caught by law enforcement, send them home. Or, better yet, turn off their job sources in this Country and they’ll leave. Arizona is already setting the standard for that!
As far as border security? LET THE BORDER AGENTS AND NATIONAL GUARD DO THEIR JOBS and STOP TYING THEIR HANDS!!
Problem solved…
SouthernPride on July 10, 2007 at 6:39 PM
Sorry for the double click.
Allah, you wanna delete one of the above?
ColtsFan on July 10, 2007 at 6:39 PM
One of the best self descriptions I have ever seen! Bar none.
cmdrsubfleet on July 10, 2007 at 6:39 PM
That has not been my experience at all.
I grew up along the border, (admittedly during the 80’s) and I’ve recently worked in an industry heavily reliant on illegal Mexican labor.
Our border needs to be secured but I have no animosity towards the laborers themselves.
The politicians and industry heads who have let this problem fester?
Don’t ask.
billy on July 10, 2007 at 6:39 PM
Billy, try being a white girl, living in south texas, married to a mexican, a very well-off mexican. Your attitude would change.
heatherrc77 on July 10, 2007 at 6:41 PM
“Illegal aliens generally do NOT want U.S. citizenship. Americans are very vain thinking that everybody in the world wants to be a U.S. citizen. Mexicans want to remain citizens of their home country while obtaining the benefits offered by the United States such as employment, medical care, in-state tuition, government subsidized housing and free education for their offspring. Their main attraction is employment and their loyalty usually remains at home. They want benefits earned and subsidized by middle class Americans. What illegal aliens want are benefits of American residence without paying the price.
Mexico is NOT a friend of the United States. Since 1848 Mexicans have resented the United States. During World War I, Mexico allowed German spies to operate freely in Mexico to spy on the U.S.. During World War II, Mexico allowed the Axis powers to spy on the U.S. from Mexico. During the Cold War Mexico allowed spies hostile to the U.S. to operate
freely. The attack on the Twin Towers in 2001 was cheered and applauded all across Mexico. Today, Mexican school children are taught that the U.S. stole California, Arizona, new Mexico and Texas. If you don’t believe it, check out some Mexican textbooks written for their schoolchildren.”
– David J. Stoddard, 27 year veteran of the Border Patrol
MB4 on July 10, 2007 at 6:42 PM
There’s a huge difference between what they tell you to your face and what they say at home.
PRCalDude on July 10, 2007 at 6:42 PM
Perhaps you should enlighten us, maybe on your blog.
PRCalDude on July 10, 2007 at 6:43 PM
What is ‘perfect border security’? A fence? How long will it take to build a fence along the ENTIRE border and at what cost? How many more millions will come across before the fence project is completed? More agents? How many more agents and at what cost? That may slow the flow, but the flow will continue nonetheless.
As long as they are (eventually) rewarded, they will find a way to make it to the US. What’s to stop them from finding new ways? Come on a tourist visa and overstay it? Take a trip to Canada and waltz on down? Going to need some more agents at the Northern border, eh?
As a matter of principle, I voted no. However, there could be other compromises I’d be willing to entertain. But not outright amnesty. The last amnesty is what caused the current situation. Creating the conditions for another ’situation’ would not help matters any.
Clouds on July 10, 2007 at 6:44 PM
NO. I don’t beleive the 12 million number that has been out there for years, I live in Ca., there are at least that many here. Dual citizenship should also be stopped. People take advatage and use both countries for their benefit.
calgrammy on July 10, 2007 at 6:46 PM
Really? You think so, huh? If only there was some way to test that thesis…hmmmm…a region in a America with a longstanding, supposedly integrated Hispanic population…hmmm…
Oh wait! New Mexico!
Read the following articles:
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2007/05/you-mean-theres-new-mexico-c-montgomery.html
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2007/05/results-of-159-years-of-hispanic.html
You don’t get assimilation by subsidizing the promoting of ethnically discrete populations.
Want to solve illegal immigration in about 5 minutes and without having to build a wall?
-End welfare
-End affirmative action
-End medical care for illegals
-End in-state tuition for illegals
-End any government regulation housing, hiring, or personal association
You’ll get the fewest number of hard-working immigrants desirous of assimilation that you could ever imagine.
tad on July 10, 2007 at 6:47 PM
Heh. I could go for days about all the crapola I had to put up with… :)
heatherrc77 on July 10, 2007 at 6:47 PM
Ron Paul.
Savage on July 10, 2007 at 6:47 PM
The question is precisely to test your willingness to compromise. Judging by most of the responses here, most of you would not compromise under any circumstance, that wasn’t exactly what you want. That’s a little troubling..
bmac on July 10, 2007 at 6:48 PM
Mr. Stoddard, excellent post and thank you for your years in the Border Patrol.
My husband has worked with illegals in the past. They had their Mexican flags at their work stations and flat out admitted they had the right to be here because Texas is a part of Mexico. My uncle in Dallas wrote us last week of an discussion he had with a Mexican national (here legally) who said the exact same thing.
Wake up people!!!!
SouthernPride on July 10, 2007 at 6:48 PM
I’m not quite sure what rules legal immigration follows – I don’t think there are quotas, but, I’m pretty sure that the system doesn’t operate under the “U.S. has unlimited space for new people” principal.
So, every illegal that is legalized is one less spot that is available for legal immigrants waiting in line.
Furthermore, it makes a mockery of the rule of law, which is one of the principals that has helped to make America great.
So, it hurts them by delaying the point at which there will be an open ’slot’ for them to legally migrate as well as degrading (to a certain extent) the foundational principals of the country that they are working so hard to migrate to.
Additionally, the flood of illegals depresses the wages in unskilled low-wage sectors that often serve as a legal immigrant’s gateway into the American workforce. This means that their initial earning potential is lessened.
Finally, amnesty harms us all by rewarding illegal (i.e. bad) behavior which does nothing more than encourage continued illegal behavior. 1-3 million amnestied in 1986 has become 12-30 million waiting for amnesty in 2007.
JadeNYU on July 10, 2007 at 6:49 PM
Why go to a Mexican textbook? U.S. textbooks say much the same thing.
heatherrc77, I don’t see your point really. Girl marries successful Mexican, Mexican girls act resentful.
And?
As for PRCaldude, the “they must be talking about me if they’re speaking Spanish” routine is pretty lame.
billy on July 10, 2007 at 6:54 PM
A better question is: how many amnesties would you grant in exchange for perfect border security?
geoff on July 10, 2007 at 6:55 PM
The subject of illegal immigration is often unfairly painted in terms of “USA vs. Mexico.”
But this portrait is not true at all. There are many, many non-Mexicans who are here illegally in the USA.
And these non-Mexicans come from many different “countries of interest” that pose a grave security risk.
Under the past failed record of the USA government, any individual from any country can get “path to USA citizenship”, just as long as you plant both feet on USA soil.
When the USA government has a documented policy of rewarding law-breakers, then this act of “encouragement” only serves as a reminder to future generations: keep on breaking USA’s laws, because amnesty will eventually be given to you.
ColtsFan on July 10, 2007 at 6:55 PM
Billy,
My point was that OF COURSE they tell you they love this country to your face, then they fly the Mexican flag at home. Speaking Spanish in an English-speaking country because you don’t want to learn English is inherently an act of hostility.
PRCalDude on July 10, 2007 at 6:57 PM
a good compromise leaves both sides somewhat dissatisfied.
treyevans on July 10, 2007 at 6:58 PM
Resentful?? That isn’t the half of it. My husbands own familia looked down on me because I was white and I took a good Mexican away from a Mexican girl who truly deserves him.
Everytime I went somewhere, and my husband noticed this also, the Mexican men didn’t just stare, they moleste you.
I was called a snob because I wouldn’t eat the eggs they made..I hate eggs, always have.
I never knew what the hell I was doing with my kids.
I didn’t clean right, I didn’t cook right and I wasn’t a slave to my husband. OMG, I ate my food without serving him first!!
I had one ally in his family and she would translate the conversations they had in Spanish and yes, they WERE talking about me.
I was a lazy, snobby, money hungry, man stealer.
heatherrc77 on July 10, 2007 at 7:00 PM
Not just ‘No’ but ‘HELL NO’
Timothy S. Carlson on July 10, 2007 at 7:00 PM
Most illegals are Mexicans, however Coltsfan, you are correct. There are many from other areas of South America as well. The nightmare scenario of Middle Easterners coming across the border has already happened as well, I’m willing to bet. If not illegally crossing borders, obtaining Visas and disappearing off the radar.
SouthernPride on July 10, 2007 at 7:00 PM
There’s more than a Border. You forget all the people who get in legally on a temporary basis and let their visas or whatever expire and disappear into the woodwork and the increased level that would happen in if we shut down the border.
“The Border” is a serious oversimplification of the problem, and I imagine that without internal security, the problem will continue, so thats a NO.
Bad Candy on July 10, 2007 at 7:01 PM
“Perect border security” without considering the damage done to the legal system by giving unquestioned amnesty to scofflaws (at best), criminals (of all gradations, from drug sellers to murderers) and potential terrorists (on their expired student visas, is a deadly delusion.
NO.
profitsbeard on July 10, 2007 at 7:01 PM
You certainly marry the family when you get married, huh?
PRCalDude on July 10, 2007 at 7:03 PM
That’s a stupid comment. Are the Amish, who to this day speak a dialect of German, hostile? Uh, not really. They spend most of their time building barns, for Christ’s sake.
What is hostile is to speak another language–specifically, one that majority does not speak–and to assume that, as a result, other people have to accommodate you.
The Amish get that; Hispanics, to a large degree, do not.
tad on July 10, 2007 at 7:04 PM
The reason the illegals who are already here aren’t going anywhere is because we don’t enforce our employment laws. If we left our borders wide open but enforced our employment laws it wouldn’t take long before nearly all of the illegals would leave of their own accord.
The reason for the fence is to keep terrorists out, IMO, but if the flood of illegal aliens crossing the border stopped it would be much easier for our border patrol to react to terrorists and drug dealers, so even then a physical barrier probably wouldn’t be required.
Enforce employment laws and the problem goes away. We don’t have to use jack-booted tactics to round them up and deport them. We don’t even need a fence.
There is no such thing as “perfect” border security as long as we are unwilling to enforce our laws. Providing amnesty would clearly demonstrate that we still do not have the will to enforce our laws, so therefore the premise of the poll question is bogus.
In other words, the “amnesty” portion of the poll question is the proof that “perfect border security” is a canard.
FloatingRock on July 10, 2007 at 7:04 PM
They are now predicting 60 million people in California by 2050. A thousand times no.
Blake on July 10, 2007 at 7:05 PM
Welllll…1917, most of the remaining German-language periodicals closed shop before they were burned down, while people who spoke German in public were beaten by mobs or arrested on suspicions of treason and espionage (apparently it was okay to question their patriotism).
Not suggesting mobs shut down Telemundo. Just pointing out there was a reason German-language publishers got of the biz and encouraged their readers to assimilate right quick. Won’t happen in the 21st century. We’ll end up making Spanish the official language.
Radish on July 10, 2007 at 7:05 PM
NO NO NO
What is so hard to understand about ILLEGAL??
And for those people that actually support the idea of amnesty, you are the TRUE racists. I am sick and tired of the people that are against people breaking the law being put on the defensive by the race card.
THE TRUE RACISTS are the ones that ask the questions “Do you hate Mexicans?” because the premise of their question is that only a Mexican would break the law and invade this country. The people against amnesty don’t care if you came from mexico, asia, canada, russia, germany, africa, etc. We don’t care about your skin tone at all. We care about the law and enforcing our borders.
Voidseeker on July 10, 2007 at 7:05 PM
OK, please do. But you’re in Oregon now, right? What were you doing in South Texas?
Ali-Bubba on July 10, 2007 at 7:05 PM
Pretty much what I meant. But thanks.
PRCalDude on July 10, 2007 at 7:06 PM
Good. More ballast. That way, when it falls into the ocean, it will be sure to sink all the way to the bottom.
Ali-Bubba on July 10, 2007 at 7:06 PM
Only if one presumes that a ‘no’ vote automatically stems from a racist attitude toward Mexican-descended people. Isn’t that what you’re doing–presuming bad faith?
BTW, I voted ‘yes’ because of the adjective ‘perfect.’ I figured that, that in a fantasy-land where the words ‘perfect’ and ‘government project’ are able to pass the laugh test, we could afford to be generous.
baldilocks on July 10, 2007 at 7:06 PM
While Allah makes widgets in na na land, I am going home to watch back to school.
Rustyw on July 10, 2007 at 7:08 PM
And your point is …?
Ali-Bubba on July 10, 2007 at 7:08 PM
Most of the Amish speak English with regular folks, they only speak their German dialect at home, and even that has eroded significantly.
Bad Candy on July 10, 2007 at 7:09 PM
BTW, have you experienced any racism from ‘newcomers’ as the LA Times like to put it?
PRCalDude on July 10, 2007 at 7:09 PM
Yes, I am in Oregon now. My husband is in the, excuse me WAS, in the aerospace industry and we moved around a lot. I am originaly from Oregon, so Im home now. But we detoured through, Colorado for 1 year, Virginia for a few months, TX for 7 god awful years, Missouri for 3 wonderful years, and now back in OR for almost 1 year. Whew.. :)
heatherrc77 on July 10, 2007 at 7:11 PM
I yam, what I yam..
heatherrc77 on July 10, 2007 at 7:11 PM
No, here’s why. Even with not a single new latino immigrant coming into the States, the ones that are here illegally, will, with the passage of two generations, out-reproduce the indigenous population to the point that America will no longer be America. A nation is not a set of laws or constitutions. A nation is the reflection of the ethnic make-up of its people. If the ethnic makeup is primarily latino, you will have a latino country, with everything that implies.
The only solution to save the America that we know, the America that led the world in all that was good in the 20th century, is to deport, not reward, the current illegals in this country and to shut down the legal immigration avenues as well.
NumbersUSA explains it so well.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4094926727128068265
Watch this video and tell me what kind of America you want to leave your children. Math does not lie.
jihadwatcher on July 10, 2007 at 7:12 PM
baldilocks
I’m not presuming bad faith, the question, as I said in an earlier post, is to test our willingness to compromise.Not a be-all end-all answer to immigration reform. Judging by the flat-out HELL-NO’s, and angry posts, it’s looking a little suspect around here, is all.
bmac on July 10, 2007 at 7:13 PM
i voted yes, hinged upon the caveat that perfect border security is by definition impossible.
but if we could actually keep the status quo and go forward, no more floods of illegals, I think we could keep the ship of state upright. I share the above sentiments about controlling who comes in and what it says about a person to have broken laws to come here. But if the pretend mental game here is no one else gets in that we don’t vet first, but we have to live with those who are already here…yeah, I’d take that bet.
TexasDan on July 10, 2007 at 7:13 PM
I voted no but only because I don’t want total amnesty. We would need to weed out those who have a criminal record and deport them. I’m not talking about those whose crime is being here illegaly. I’m talking about those involved in drugs, rapist, murderers, those with a history of serious traffic offenses… I have no problem with someone who wants to come here and work and contribute to our society. I just wish more of them could do it legally.
boomer on July 10, 2007 at 7:13 PM
Allah, my thought is that it does indeed qualify as a precedent, based on my perception of your original question:
“Would you accept total, immediate amnesty for illegals in exchange for perfect border security?”
I perceived your question being directed towards **exterior, border security** on the outer edges of the USA. What about visa over-stays?
What about someone coming to USA with a travel or student visa, gets pregnant, and then later applies for USA citizenship due to her child? I work at a hospital and I see this quite frequently.
I agree with BadCandy, “without internal security” regarding visa over-stays, anchor-babies, etc, the proposed solution does not work at all.
ColtsFan on July 10, 2007 at 7:13 PM
Right–though some of the more cloistered communities don’t speak English that well.
My point is that the Amish don’t demand that anyone be forced to learn high German in order to accommodate their presence.
If any group–Hispanic, white, or otherwise–wants to self-segregate, speak a non-majority language, etc., good for them. I wish them the best of luck. They just shouldn’t expect any special accommodation.
tad on July 10, 2007 at 7:14 PM
True tad. That is one of the things I applaud my in-laws for. They spoke nothing but Spanish when they came here, but as soon as they had kids, it was English only at home because they didn’t want their kids having a more difficult time learning because of the language barrier.
heatherrc77 on July 10, 2007 at 7:18 PM
I’m sorry about your family situation. That sucks.
tikvah on July 10, 2007 at 7:19 PM
100% Wrong.
And there is no compromise needed, as THE LAWS ARE ALREADY ON THE BOOKS. It is not like there are two sides coming to the table with new ideas or different paths to take.
The question asks people to basically agree that laws are meaningless, crimes do not matter, as long as something that should already be in place is enacted in the future. Sane people are not willing to make that statement.
Emotional people that have bought into the idea that “anti-amnesty” = “racist” and are afraid to actually think about the issue support the idea of amnesty.
The USA has already tried amnesty once. It failed, completely. To try it a second time expecting a different result would be the very definition of insanity.
Voidseeker on July 10, 2007 at 7:20 PM
Bush’s response to Illegal
ImmigrationAlien Invasion make ME want to cry too.I’ve known and liked ‘Hispanics’ since I was a kid. Other than my time in the military, I’ve lived within a couple hundred miles of the border, sometimes right on it, and also worked in Mexico itself for six months or so.
I’ve known families that have been on the same Spanish Land Grant land here in New Mexico for 300 + years, a century prior to my ancestors quiting running around the bogs of Ireland and the lochs of Scotland to come here.
I’ve known and loved many a first generation American that started out in Mexico, That came here because they loved the idea of America, and embraced its culture. My first ‘grown up’ girlfriend was a Senorita Rita Delores Rodriguez, and I still miss her after 32 years.
Then around the end of the 1970s I started noticing something; The tenor of the people coming north changed. Oh, not all of them, and not all at once. But it became obvious that a lot of them came not because they loved the ‘idea’, the culture of America, but just for the opportunity to profit from our successful culture. Many through honest effort, more than a few choosing crime or living off the benificence of the taxpayers.
By the end of the 80s I saw fewer and fewer of the kind immigrants that I liked and respected. By the 90’s it became pretty obvious that a serious percentage of them not only did not like America, just its opportunities; And the thing that makes me angry most is that they intend to recreate the failed culture which they fled in America.
Sucking at the teat with all their might while failing to feed the cow…. They don’t care if the cow dies next week, as long as they get their milk this week.
Then a few years ago, it became obvious that there is a small, but still significant percentage that aren’t willing to settle for sucking at the teat, they want to butcher the cow for meat AND take over the ranch.
Meanwhile, I know well a nice, hardworking Green Carded lady, who is raising her son to eventually be a proud American, has been trying very hard to get her citizenship for 18 years… But the immigration authorities here keep ‘losing her paperwork’ and bumping her to the back of the line.
LegendHasIt on July 10, 2007 at 7:20 PM
This thread is pretty much a downer.
The immigrants themselves are not the real perpatrators of injustice here.
The politicians, in the U.S. but most especially in Mexico, are the ones who should be held accountable for:
a) not securing the southrn border
b) not providing an enviroment for an industrious man to succeed
c) encouraging Mexican and American citizens to see this as a racial conflict rather than as a political one.
billy on July 10, 2007 at 7:20 PM
Thanks, but I don’t see them much anymore. I secured my borders!! Heh.
heatherrc77 on July 10, 2007 at 7:20 PM
Comment of the day. Very literary.
PRCalDude on July 10, 2007 at 7:23 PM
Like I said earlier, Immigration is NOT a Mexican issue, it is an Illegal Immigrant issue, whether from Mexico, Iran, Afghanistan, Canada…any other country besides the USA.
heatherrc77 on July 10, 2007 at 7:23 PM
Voidseeker-
I don’t think you understand the question, but I’m sure you think you do.
bmac on July 10, 2007 at 7:23 PM
This got me thinking. When I lived overseas, I made every effort to learn the language, and I didn’t expect anyone to make accommodations for me (though it was always nice when they could; it takes a long time to learn a new language). Behaving any other way would have made me a rude American, demanding my way. Why is it suddenly bigoted for me to expect the same of people coming to America?
tikvah on July 10, 2007 at 7:25 PM
I agree.
heatherrc77 on July 10, 2007 at 7:25 PM
Sorry bmac, you’re way wrong on that. I think I laid out a good reason, Border security doesn’t end illegal immigration. It takes internal and external enforcement.
Plus it sets a bad precedent, that a large group can be rewarded for illegal activity in a huge way. The government loses its moral authority to enforce law, as they can’t say all are equal under it because they’ve awarded lawbreaking en masse.
Every trial could theoretically become as much about the Gov’ts right to enforce the law as it was whether the person broke the law. Not to mention individual discipline would break down. One of the ways a free society works is that people just follow law on their own because all are equal under it, but once you allow large scale breakage, that unspoken promise falls apart, people no longer assume equality, and they move into Machiavelli mode. They start doing what they want to get ahead, if others can break the law to get ahead, why not me?
Bad Candy on July 10, 2007 at 7:27 PM
No, but I don’t live in East LA.
People here are say “hell no” but saying that it has nothing to do with racism.
If you say that the unwillingness to compromise is “suspect” and you say that the unwillingness might be due to racism even though the others say that it has nothing to do with race, then you are indeed presuming bad faith.
This is what the concept of good/bad faith is about–taking people at their word.
baldilocks on July 10, 2007 at 7:28 PM
When I say equality, I mean under the law.
Bad Candy on July 10, 2007 at 7:30 PM
Well said.
It pretty much tracks my own experience.
The part I’ve highlighted in this comment, doesn’t it describe much of our native born population?
Isn’t that our real, deep-seated problem?
billy on July 10, 2007 at 7:32 PM
I can’t help but feel that the premise is flawed.
We can get amnesty, but perfect enforcement isn’t possible.
urbancenturion on July 10, 2007 at 7:32 PM
So, it was only in South Texas, where Mexicans are very numerous, that you experienced this negative attitude toward your marriage?
Hmmm …
Ali-Bubba on July 10, 2007 at 7:34 PM
This isn’t what you were saying earlier:
PRCalDude on July 10, 2007 at 7:34 PM
My first instinct was to vote no but I decided to ask my wife what was her opinion. My wife is a dyed-in-the-wool California liberal (I am a southeastern conservative). Her immediate reaction was no. She based her decision on her experience with a parapro at the elementary school where she teaches. This parapro is a legal immigrant who my wife had assisted in preparing for the tests that she had to pass to become a legal citizen. My wife was adamant that no one should be given amnesty as long as there are people who are busting their a$$ to becoming legal citizens. For what it’s worth, I think this shows again that this issue is one that most conservatives and liberals agree with, i.e., citizenship is a privilege that must be earned.
dawgyear on July 10, 2007 at 7:36 PM
Yes, although there are some areas in MO and OR that are saturated by the Mexicans that I get the same looks and stuff, but I can avoid those.
There is no hiding from it in S. TX..thats for sure
heatherrc77 on July 10, 2007 at 7:37 PM
I just finished entering surveys for work. The survey was given to a certain segment of the illegal immigrant population. Of the surveys that I entered 98% receive MediCal, 80% stated “Domestic Partnership” as their marital status – meaning that they live with the father of their children – which means they qualify for medical, food stamps, WIC, etc. The average age was 18 – 24 and the average number of children was 3. Unfortunately due to the relatively young age they are still capable of having more children which will then need to be taken care of also. Oh, and of those surveys entered 99% spoke no English.
I voted NO…secure the border, set up ways to enforce our current laws on the books, fix the legal immigration backlog and then we’ll talk about those that are here illegally.
ProudPatriot on July 10, 2007 at 7:37 PM
I’ve been compromising since 1981. Our schools are crap. Our hospitals are crap. Our infrastructure is crap. Enough.
Blake on July 10, 2007 at 7:38 PM
bmac –
Since obviously you must be the only one with a brain here, please explain it.
Although I would agree with compromise if you meant “to make a shameful or disreputable concession”, which is what amnesty is, but I am sure you think the question is more “to adjust or settle by mutual concessions” right?
Tell me what concession would the borders-first side be losing if the illegals are not granted amnesty? What concession do they gain if they are granted amnesty in the question?
Teach away.
Voidseeker on July 10, 2007 at 7:38 PM
Amen brother
heatherrc77 on July 10, 2007 at 7:39 PM
baldilocks-
Wow, nobody gets my point. The fury directed at this question, is a little over the top. I’m not calling anyone a racist, all I’m saying is, when conservatives get angry for being called a racist, then turn around and scream “HELL NO” to a possible compromise, well, then don’t bitch about people misunderstanding you. All that says is you will not accept anything that doesn’t fit your plan, and the world don’t work that way brother.
Bad Candy-
Again, this is not about the perfect solution. There will never be one. What would you sacrifice to get at least closer to a fix?
bmac on July 10, 2007 at 7:40 PM
bmac is to the Illegal Immigration Issue, like csdeven is to Fred! issues!!
heatherrc77 on July 10, 2007 at 7:41 PM
Ergo … where Mexicans are numerous, intergroup animosity is high. Whereas, in places where Mexicans are relatively rare, such animosity is less severe.
You make a strong argument against amnesty, then.
Ali-Bubba on July 10, 2007 at 7:41 PM
Si, Senior..or Seniorita? :)
heatherrc77 on July 10, 2007 at 7:42 PM
Good to know.
Voidseeker on July 10, 2007 at 7:45 PM
Over 20 years ago I knew a woman who had immigrated from France and another whose family had immigrated from Chile but also whose family came from France. I mentioned that my mother was French, too, (her family immigrated in the 1700s)and wasn’t it ironic that all three of us were French.
Well, the two women were really offended. They adamantly stated that they were not French but American citizens and had their citizenship for several years. I tried to explain that they were misunderstanding me, but they wouldn’t hear it. You just don’t find people like that very often anymore.
Blake on July 10, 2007 at 7:47 PM
President Tom Tancredo–END OF DISCUSSION !!!!!
Legions on July 10, 2007 at 7:47 PM
Let me preface this by saying that I actually voted yes.
I think it’s a rather large (and not logically based) jump to go from people answering “Hell No!” to “They must be racist” or, as you put it, being able to understand why other people might misunderstand and think the people are racist.
The question itself has nothing whatsoever to do with race. The question is whether people are willing to grant amnesty to lawbreakers (i.e. illegal border crossers/visa overstayers/etc) in return for perfect border control. Isn’t it more logical to conclude that the “Hell No”s are indicative of people being strongly biased against lawbreakers as opposed to revealing any sort of bias against one race or another?
JadeNYU on July 10, 2007 at 7:48 PM
Dudes-
Believe me, I want this problem fixed as much as all of you. My point is that conservatives get mad when called racists, then turn around and scream HELL NO to a possible compromise. Don’t bitch if people misunderstand that. Guess what? It’s not a perfect world, compromises are going to have to happen. I’m not calling anyone a racist, but if you won’t give one inch on this, your going to be in for a lot of disappointment.
bmac on July 10, 2007 at 7:48 PM
The answer is no,and by the way I,m sick and tired
of hearing the immigrants getting scewed over.
The LIBERALS keep there talking points about,
were all Immigrants,ya when you come in LEGALLY.
canopfor on July 10, 2007 at 7:53 PM
Like the precedent set back in the 80’s. Yea sure I have heard that crap before.
Look If you are asking if I would accept amnesty in return for border security….No
I would accept a guest worker program with a touchback requirement. Give employers 6 months to straighten up the status of all their employees…..you bet, where do I sign.
conservnut on July 10, 2007 at 7:53 PM
HeatherRC77:
I should point out that the “man stealer” treatment you received from your husband’s family (and other Mexicans) about your marriage is very similar to what you’d experience from blacks (especially, black women) if you married a black man.
You have to understand that, from the perspective of a Mexican woman, by marrying you, your husband has rejected and disrespected his own people as being inferior. To them, his marriage to a non-Mexican is as if he were saying that one of “his own” is “not good enough for him.”
I’m not saying it’s rational. I’m just saying that’s how they feel. You were raised to reject racism as unworthy, Mexicans were raised to consider hatred of gringos as the very essence of patriotism. (And they would reject the idea that hating gringos qualifies as racism, since from the Mexican nationalist perspective, gringos deserve to be hated.)
Ali-Bubba on July 10, 2007 at 7:53 PM
0_0
Quoting question:
“Would you accept total, immediate amnesty for illegals in exchange for perfect border security?”
It is about the perfect solution. The Borders First people are being offered “perfect” borders – the solution they want. The price they are being asked to pay for their perfect solution is to agree to the Amnesty First’s crowd’s “perfect solution” of total, immediate amnesty for all people who have broke those same borders up to this point.
It is not a compromise between two groups, it is a question if one group is willing to compromise principal to give into the demands of another group.
Voidseeker on July 10, 2007 at 7:53 PM
The poll question makes the same erroneous assumption that the “shamnesty” bill did: linking some kind of solution for the illegals already here with border security. They are separate issues! Deal with the border first, period. Our incompetent Federal government can’t deal with more than one task at a time anyway.
infidel4life on July 10, 2007 at 7:57 PM
heatherrc77 – “I didn’t clean right, I didn’t cook right and I wasn’t a slave to my husband. OMG, I ate my food without serving him first!!
Maybe you posted it elsewhere, but I sure hope that you have or are divorcing the guy!!!
MB4 on July 10, 2007 at 7:59 PM
By the way, all you people that think we should deport all illegals even after we’ve built a fence – Do you just not like Mexicans? Or do you HATE THEM? :)
Enrique on July 10, 2007 at 5:38 PM
Uh, Enrique. I see that little smiley, but that comment is being levelled harshly by lots of people now at decent people all the time.
Hold it. Aren’t you Cuban? (;D)
naliaka on July 10, 2007 at 8:00 PM
LegendHasIt on July 10, 2007 at 8:00 PM
DOH! What is going on with the tags? Is it me or the software?
The same thing happened to me yesterday.
Ignore the strike-throughs above. There weren’t supposed to be ANY. And the quote block was supposed to end before my comments.
Sorry.
LegendHasIt on July 10, 2007 at 8:04 PM
No-NO-NO, Because we know the Dummocrats would allow at least 9 more “family members” in (aka chain migration) and the middle class would cease to exist as we now know it. THANK GOD ALL YOU GOOD PEOPLE ROSE UP & DROPPED THE HAMMER ON THOSE WEEK KNEEDED REPUBLICANS IN D.C..
Still Seething,
BVE
CCTradiogrunt on July 10, 2007 at 8:08 PM
PRCalDude on July 10, 2007 at 7:34 PM
Kinda missing your point here, sorry.
On the one hand I say that most Mexican immigrants, in my personal experience, simply are pursuing better opportunities here, rather than at home in Mexico because of the policies and practices of the Mexican Gov’t.
On the other hand, I say that immigrants are picking up on the prevalent attitude, shared by so many our political elite, that “still significant percentage that aren’t willing to settle for sucking at the teat, they want to butcher the cow for meat AND take over the ranch.”*
If we don’t exhibit some sort of confidence in the superiority of our own culture, then why do we expect immigrants to do just that?
*LegendHasIt on July 10, 2007 at 7:20 PM
billy on July 10, 2007 at 8:13 PM
Heather is my sister. Her and I are married to brothers, so all that she says she has gone through, I have too, just at a lower level because I (thankfully) never lived in TX by my husband’s family. But they did come up here to WA, and called me a whore, bitch, etc because I am white. Our own mother in law has told people that her own grandchildren’s heritage is ruined because they are not full Mexican. I get dirty looks all of the time by Mexican women when they see me with my husband. He says it’s just because he is a handsome stud :), but we both know why it happens.
StephC on July 10, 2007 at 8:16 PM
She was talking about his aunts saying that, not him. :)
StephC on July 10, 2007 at 8:18 PM
We need to stop the bleeding before we let the patient check out. So I’ll take a no on Shamnesty and a yes on sealing the border,…big ass wall, hell a double wall, with razor wire, gun turrets and 50 cals mounted in them..on BOTH borders.
Once the sewage has stopped flowing in we seek out the known criminals and ship them to a humungous holding station, a tent city, very uncomfortable, no AC just fans (like we had in the quonset huts in the Suck). Once we get a sizable herd we bus them to the border in old school busses, unlock the leg irons and flush them back to whence they came. Millions flood to the borders because tent cities aint no fun, homie.
We imediately stop all benefits and welfare. We use the money saved to fund the deportations.
Reduce our jail population by one quarter by deporting the illegals therein. We use the money saved to fund the deportations.
We retract anchor baby status. Millions leave because they see that the gravy train has dried up. Now they are doing our work for us.
We don’t have to actively seek out the 30 million crim-aliens; we would simply apprehend those that showed up through the normal criminal process and shovel them into the deportation grinder, too.
Eventually, as the numbers get smaller those who try to vote, get a license, turn in library books late etc, get caught too. Its a slow process, it won’t happen over night. It’s like getting rid of weeds in your lawn, it takes a few seasons, but it gets progressively easier as they become fewer and fewer.
Panty waisted liberals will shudder and spill their latte as they pooh pooh about how mean this policy is, I’d rather think of it as tough love. Then we begin a sane immigration policy that benefits our country.
Alden Pyle on July 10, 2007 at 8:19 PM
Hey, newsflash for the group:
The correct term for people that voted “no” to the question “Would you accept total, immediate amnesty for illegals in exchange for perfect border security?” is not “racist.”
The correct term is: “logical.”
Why? Because they recognize there is no perfect border security.
The poll is based on a fantasy question. It’s the political equivalent of asking a rational person to buy into something that is real and dangerous (amnesty for lawbreakers) in exchange for a fantasy (perfect border security). Voting anything other than “no” would be completely irrational for a sane grown-up living in an industrialized representative republic.
What’s most disappointing is not how leftists can now somehow use this thread to punctuate their twisted views that e-e-e-e-e-evil conservative Republicans are Latino-hating raaaaaaaaacists because of the majority “no” vote in this poll. The disappointment here is that a well-respected intellectual atheist and political conservative is the one metaphorically asking his audience if they’d give up four hours of sleep per day in exchange for mutant healing powers–and then is surprised when the audience does not vote like he did in the fantasy poll to choose the mutant healing powers.
I doubt that an intellectual atheist, whose belief structures are undoubtedly rooted in a high regard for empirical evidence and logic, would you have said “Yes” in answer to a poll question: “Would you accept believing in Jesus Christ in exchange for everlasting life?”
Just sayin’, that’s all. This is not a crisis and I am still the #1 HotAir.com fan.
ScottMcC on July 10, 2007 at 8:21 PM
No amnesty, ever. Ever.
I have just two things to say on this topic, if you’re here illegally, get out and stay out. Period.
Zorro on July 10, 2007 at 8:23 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »