DNC Chair: Republicans Believe Illegal Immigration 'Should be a Crime'

reply to post by projectvxn


and you sir probably did not have 2 wives
and children before being illegally married
to a US Citizen. just saying

Plus, there is nothing in Obama Sr's
INS files which allude to his ever
attempting to get a US Passport
or US Citizenship. Matter of fact,
all his INS documentation up til
he was deported in 1964 show
the exact opposite.

Just think about putting urself
in Obama Sr's shoes for a moment.
If you had married a US Citizen
legally, wouldn't it make it a hell
of a lot easier to come and go
in and out of the US with a US
Passport ??? Why did he never
apply for one if legally married
to a US Citizen ???

Why go through all the hassle
of yearly extensions when flashing
a US Passport could get u in
without the hassle.

That proves Obama Sr. and Ann
Dunham were not legally married.

reply to post by boondock-saint


All I see in any of his immigration papers if those are in fact legit, is him being railroaded out of Harvard, denied an extension and him leaving voluntarily to go back to Kenya. I imagine you would see something different, it is clear you take any and all opportuinities to spread your Obama conspiracies all over these forums. Your credibility is shot in my eyes.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by Janky Red

 

I believe we should enforce the laws already in place. Illegal immigration is a problem in this country and we shouldn't be rewarding it.

I agree, no employment and no welfare, my line in the sand

But do you think using the police and all that it entails is the best way to utilize the existing laws?

Do you know the man hours associated with 20 million, apprehensions, bookings, arraignments???
I mean if you were rangled you would like to be judged fairly and have the opportunity to prove your status, correct?

This just leads to RDIF real fast man.

Originally posted by projectvxn
Firstly, it already is a crime.

Secondly, what about those of us that aren't republican and are also legal immigrants? I want illegal immigration stopped, not rewarded. I'm tired of these social justice morons spreading this idea that illegal immigration is good. It isn't. All it does it hurt Americans, and ESPECIALLY those of us who came here legally. Like me.

Unfortunately the Democrats have decided to use a different term for them, "undocumented workers". This label removes the part that says they've committed an illegal act. It's no different than calling a thief a "liberator of non-self possessed goods". They're still a thief.

/TOA

Originally posted by Hijaqd
Seriously? There is still confusion on the issue?

Nobody is bashing IMMIGRATION, the problem is with ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION, you know the one that is AGAINST our laws, making it ILLEGAL???

Compassion or no compassion is not the debate, it is simply about more of the political kabuki theater, in this act it is DNC Chair Wasserman trying to demonize the Republican party for having the audacity to think ILLEGAL immigrants are here ILLEGALLY.

Would there be any "C'Mon feel sorry for them, let's have compassion." if we were talking about demonizing one side of the aisle for saying rapists deserve to be in prison?

"They should have a path to citizenship." For real?!?! They DO it's called LEGALLY IMMIGRATE, if you don't follow that path then you are clearly here ILLEGALLY, and yes they should get the F#@% Out, try to do it right next time!

If they would simply do their part, THE RIGHT WAY, then we could even save taxpayer money that is being tied up securing the borders to the extent they currently are (drones aren't cheap to operate), save money on the taxpayer funded residential facility that they are occupying while eating taxpayer funded food for a meal while they wait on the taxpayer funded bus driven by yet again US taxpayer funded drivers.

I'm not a republican either, but they're RIGHT, ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION is well in a word ILLEGAL, this is not one of the "grey" areas, this one is black and white.

An alien's unauthorized presence in the United States is not a crime under the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952 …. Thus many people find the term undocumented alien preferable to illegal alien, since the former avoid the implication that one's unauthorized presence in the United States is a crime. Elizabeth Hull, Undocumented Aliens and the Equal Protection Clause, 48 Brook. L. Rev. 43, 43 n.2 (1981).

Illegal?

Looks to be a pretty grey area....actually.

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by boondock-saint

 

All I see in any of his immigration papers if those are in fact legit, is him being railroaded out of Harvard, denied an extension and him leaving voluntarily to go back to Kenya.

Railroaded ???
hahahaha

the only one railroading
was Obama Sr. and he
was caught and deported.
He was lucky he didn't get
prosecuted and imprisoned.

reply to post by no time


undocumented alien huh ???
lol

try sneaking into the Superbowl
and when you can't provide
a ticket for your seat, you
get kicked out of the stadium.

Guess that makes them an undocumented
spectator.

They still get kicked out none the less.
Call it anything you like or whatever
label u want to describe it.

reply to post by boondock-saint


He didn't apply for a passport because only citizens, naturalized or natural born, have the privilege of applying for one. Being married to a US citizen while not being a naturalized citizen yourself does not entitle you to obtain the same privileges as a natural born or naturalized citizen.

reply to post by boondock-saint


Honestly, if your're going to insist on living in a fantasy land why not make it pretty? Or you could be a real man and admit why you need so badly for your conspiracies to be true. The man was obviously by no means a saint but twisting his immigration status to lend our President a psychological reason to be light on illegal immigration is just pathetic.

Originally posted by boondock-saint
reply to post by no time

 

undocumented alien huh ???
lol

try sneaking into the Superbowl
and when you can't provide
a ticket for your seat, you
get kicked out of the stadium.

Guess that makes them an undocumented
spectator.

They still get kicked out none the less.
Call it anything you like or whatever
label u want to describe it.

My only point is that it is not ILLEGAL. It is NOT a CRIME. Regardless of whether they get deported or not, you can not be imprisoned or fined or brought up on charges in the courts for being an "Illegal Alien". At least not since 1952. I am not saying I support immigration, what I support is fixing the problems that make us not want illegals in our country. Namely stop raping the working class to pay the rich their interest.

Originally posted by no time

Originally posted by Hijaqd
Seriously? There is still confusion on the issue?

Nobody is bashing IMMIGRATION, the problem is with ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION, you know the one that is AGAINST our laws, making it ILLEGAL???

Compassion or no compassion is not the debate, it is simply about more of the political kabuki theater, in this act it is DNC Chair Wasserman trying to demonize the Republican party for having the audacity to think ILLEGAL immigrants are here ILLEGALLY.

Would there be any "C'Mon feel sorry for them, let's have compassion." if we were talking about demonizing one side of the aisle for saying rapists deserve to be in prison?

"They should have a path to citizenship." For real?!?! They DO it's called LEGALLY IMMIGRATE, if you don't follow that path then you are clearly here ILLEGALLY, and yes they should get the F#@% Out, try to do it right next time!

If they would simply do their part, THE RIGHT WAY, then we could even save taxpayer money that is being tied up securing the borders to the extent they currently are (drones aren't cheap to operate), save money on the taxpayer funded residential facility that they are occupying while eating taxpayer funded food for a meal while they wait on the taxpayer funded bus driven by yet again US taxpayer funded drivers.

I'm not a republican either, but they're RIGHT, ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION is well in a word ILLEGAL, this is not one of the "grey" areas, this one is black and white.

An alien's unauthorized presence in the United States is not a crime under the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952 …. Thus many people find the term undocumented alien preferable to illegal alien, since the former avoid the implication that one's unauthorized presence in the United States is a crime. Elizabeth Hull, Undocumented Aliens and the Equal Protection Clause, 48 Brook. L. Rev. 43, 43 n.2 (1981).

Illegal?

Looks to be a pretty grey area....actually.

C'mon, from your source, bold mine cause they actually said "gobbledygook" -

“Illegal alien” is the legally precise and preferred term: The usual and preferable term in American English is illegal alien. The other forms have arisen as needless euphemisms, and should be avoided as near-gobbledygook. The problem with undocumented is that it is intended to mean, by those who use it in this phrase, "not having the requisite documents to enter or stay in a country legally. But the word strongly suggests "unaccounted for" to those unfamiliar with this quasi-legal jargon, and it may therefore obscure the meaning.

That statement is only equivocally correct, however: although illegal aliens' presence in the country is no crime, their entry into the country is. As Justice Brennan wrote in Plyler v. Doe,… "Unsanctioned entry in the United States is a crime, 8 U.S.C. § 1325…."2 Moreover, it is wrong to equal illegality with criminality, inasmuch as many illegal acts are not criminal. Illegal alien is not an opprobrious epithet: it describes one present in a country in violation of the immigration laws (hence "illegal").3

It's only grey if you intentionally blur the line, and you know it, so their mere presence is not "illegal" but since their entry was ILLEGAL, it's still black and white, it's not illegal to be in the store after hours, but the act of getting in after hours clearly was.

Why muddy the water?

The illegal entry section of the law is very clear as cited here:

8 U.S.C. § 1325 : US Code - Section 1325: Improper Entry By Alien

a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection;
misrepresentation and concealment of facts

Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States
at any time or place other than as designated by immigration
officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration
officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United
States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the
willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first
commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or
imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent
commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or
imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both

b) Improper time or place; civil penalties
Any alien who is apprehended while entering (or attempting to
enter) the United States at a time or place other than as
designated by immigration officers shall be subject to a civil
penalty of -

(1) at least $50 and not more than $250 for each such entry (or
attempted entry); or

(2) twice the amount specified in paragraph (1) in the case of
an alien who has been previously subject to a civil penalty under
this subsection.

Civil penalties under this subsection are in addition to, and not
in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be
imposed.

c) Marriage fraud
Any individual who knowingly enters into a marriage for the
purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws shall be
imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or fined not more than
$250,000, or both.

(d) Immigration-related entrepreneurship fraud
Any individual who knowingly establishes a commercial enterprise
for the purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws
shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, fined in accordance
with title 18, or both.

source

Ah.....I didn't know Cynthia McKinney was the DNC chair!!! LMAO!! one of the better quotes I've seen in a
long time. It is no wonder why America has become the laughing stock to the rest of the world.

Forget party they are all a bunch of imbeciles. Including King Dip Sh!t himself!

reply to post by Hijaqd


I actually agree.

But the truth is illegal immigration, in fact, is a grey area, as it is very hard to prove in court the criminal act of crossing the border.

At the end of the day, I don't support illegal immigration either, however, my personal experiences with illegals has been quite pleasant. And these neighbors of mine were in fact deported. All they wanted to do was raise their children away from war. Doesn't sound like they were criminal. they could not be here legally. They should have been able to stay.

EDIT:

Republicans support ending the grey area, by also making the act of being here illegally a crime. I also support getting rid of the muddy waters. And making it less of a grey area. there would need to be plenty of exceptions. Th Op stated that it was already illegal, it is not already illegal. Democrats would like to give these illegals a path to citizenship. Republicans wish to get rid of the "loophole" But do not forget that many of these same republicans tried to pass amnesty under Bush JR. Looks like it is strictly a Political stunt to me. SOURCE

Originally posted by Janky Red

Originally posted by Hijaqd
Seriously? There is still confusion on the issue?

Nobody is bashing IMMIGRATION, the problem is with ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION, you know the one that is AGAINST our laws, making it ILLEGAL???

Compassion or no compassion is not the debate, it is simply about more of the political kabuki theater, in this act it is DNC Chair Wasserman trying to demonize the Republican party for having the audacity to think ILLEGAL immigrants are here ILLEGALLY.

Would there be any "C'Mon feel sorry for them, let's have compassion." if we were talking about demonizing one side of the aisle for saying rapists deserve to be in prison?

and these people are not rapist are they???


The issue is the police factor, this country does not need an expansion of police powers

How many policemen do you think this country would need to employ to rangle tens of millions of people?

And what would that cost???

She is right, the John Wayne approach is half way to retarded as far as solutions go.

Seriously? Did I SAY they were by chance? That's whats called an analogy, those help to let people understand a concept when viewed from a different angle.

While we're being cute with wordplay, do you KNOW that "undocumented" aliens are not engaging in the crime of rape?

I have an issue with an enhanced police factor as well, as far as cost?

Yeah I don't know how much it would cost, do you know how much we would save if we did not need more police to enforce the laws that are broken by "undocumented" workers?

What would be the savings of shutting down the residential centers?

What would be the savings of not paying for their meals, on top of the meals of the currently incarcerated of our already bloated prison system which boasts the highest rate of incarceration in the world?

Originally posted by no time
reply to post by Hijaqd

 

I actually agree.

But the truth is illegal immigration, in fact, is a grey area, as it is very hard to prove in court the criminal act of crossing the border.

At the end of the day, I don't support illegal immigration either, however, my personal experiences with illegals has been quite pleasant. And these neighbors of mine were in fact deported. All they wanted to do was raise their children away from war. Doesn't sound like they were criminal. they could not be here legally. They should have been able to stay.

And here I also agree, believe it or not, but this IS where it gets grey, they should have been able to petition to stay on grounds of sanctuary (and THAT is where it gets grey, declared or undeclared war)

I don't mean to sound cruel, but this doesn't seem to be an issue with immigrants from other countries on the same scale (there are ALWAYS exceptions to the rule).

I welcome immigrants, our country holds it very closely as a tenant, but dammit, do it the right way!

It's sad that they save up a small fortune to pay a "coyote" to smuggle them in, when that very same money could have been put to use to do it legally, and they wouldn't have to worry about dying in the back of an un-airconditioned van, or having themselves or loved ones sold out as slaves.

I was waiting for somebody to discuss the law that the Obama administration is trying to enact that would make it a crime to hire an "undocumented alien" and take away the business license of said owner. That is the discussion on the table that the democrats are pushing against the "round em up and toss em out" mentality.

That is my main beef, and its not just the undocumented. I am employed by a restaurant in San Diego and many, many of our employees live accross the border as Mexican citizens and cross every day to work. Fine, but they work for less and in fear of being fired. Their work ethic is such that they wont ask for a break, sick day, vacation, hell, if they get sick or injured they go home where health insurance is free!

So when we American employees try to ask for a sick day, medical insurance, a 15 min break, we look lazy and unfocused, and are accused of taking advantage of our employer and the system, ie worker's comp, unemployment, pesky labor laws.

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by Janky Red

 

Is this not the solution many here advocate for???

That is what the law, enacted by Congress and signed by the president, calls for.

Why would a democrat try to make it sound as if asking for enforcement of the law is somehow an offense in and of itself?

...

edit on 31-5-2011 by jdub297 because: sp

Good call, and a star for your thoughts.
Maybe Debbie Wasserman Schultz is just providing a little left cover (however
incipid) to deflect the discussion away from 'selective enforcement'... and we all
know if you want to deport illegal aliens from THERE they call you a racist.
Is it possible the immigration laws have been subjected to disuse long enough
for our legisleeches to literally IGNORE them: and ask whether or not we should
consult case law?? Hey who knows, maybe burying a cat on Saturday in Boise
is against an 1884 municipal code, Debbie... I'd look it up just to make sure next
time, just to keep from looking as twittenette as this. OMG

Leaving me again convinced one of the most dangerous five organizations
to be launched in the US during the 20th century was the National Educational
Association. The way our test scores have been shaking out their alphabet soup
redefinition should be Numbskulls Et Al.