well would you? i know if they pass a bill that doesnt say bieng here isnt a felony and mass deportation i am gonna vote against him next time.and i know alot of americans wil do the same thing.drugs and illegal invason wont be tolerated in this country.or we might as well be mexico.
2006-07-23 04:53:12 · 22 answers · asked by antho c 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
I would vote against him. My fiance is trying to move here (legally) from Australia and it is taking forever. I don't have an issue with anyone being here...legally. I think that all of these illegal Mexicans who are whinging about how their so-called rights are being violated should be booted back to Mexico. If someone is here illegally, they have no rights!!! All of these politicians who are in favor of letting these jokers stay are loco. If my fiance has to go through the process, so should all of these illegal aliens. They should be sent back and told they can try to gain citizenship in X amount of years.
2006-07-23 05:00:48 · answer #1 · answered by Wannabeadoc06 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
NO!!!
All the LEGAL immigrants that wait up to 16 years to become naturalized would be denied their rights and civil liberties!
Illegals are mostly FELON criminals, or, very under educated gangbangers/drug mules! Kick them OUT, build a huge WALL!
Put MORE INS agents on the Border, update the technology!
Encourage Mexico to get the economy straight, as 1% of the people own 99% of the wealth!!!
Immigrants to Mexico will NEVER own land, and will ALWAYS even after naturalization to citizenship, be the LAST to be considered for any job!
Mexico discrimates against legal immigrants!!!
Burn a Mexican flag? EXECUTION, by a firing squad!!!
2006-07-23 05:01:59 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
My view differs somewhat from yours.
However, I am going to vote against Feinstein, with some reluctance, and am supporting Mountbank, who is anti-illegal immigrant in her place.
I am not sure it will be successful because not everyone here considers this the biggest issue, and Feinstein is actually sensible on many issues, even to a conservative like myself. She also has great seniority which I hate to lose for our state. All the same, I think it was irresponsible for her to vote in favor of the Senate Bill particularly given the effects it would have on our state of California, which is on the front lines. Her compromises were WAY too expensive for us.
If it were Boxer up for reelection, I think we would be successful in 'voting her out', there are enough Reagan Democrats here who find her barely tolerable to begin with. With Feinstein we will have to wait and see. Mountbank is currently behind, but a huge number of voters so far have 'no opinion' of him, so he just has to 'come out of the shadows' himself.
2006-07-23 05:42:21 · answer #3 · answered by DAR 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably not, since I know that this piece of legislation is being used to cover the new Internet law that congress is trying to slip past us. If the New Internet law is passed, then all music and movies will be encoded in a new way that will force all people to have to buy new DVD players, MP3, Computers, and Cd's. Not only that, but since the companies are going to have to change these items to read the music and movies, they are going to charge more for the items. So that 100.00 MP3 is now going to cost you 150.00 for the same one. And the movie and music industry which is behind this is going to charge more for having to place the codes on the music and movies. Just another way for them to make more money, and place it in congress pocket.
2006-07-23 05:02:40 · answer #4 · answered by Artistic Prof. 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Me, I even emailed Arnold yet he's an immigrant and thinks we choose maximum of those human beings right here because bi-golly no man or woman else will do their jobs....Oh and the white abode also! With little success.. i imagine the yankee those who oppose amnesty might want to march like the Mexicans do .. yet how do you persuade them to drop what they're doing and march? I undergo in options a time even as i replaced right into a toddler and we did those variety of jobs for better pocket funds! We now stay in a predominantly unlawful Mexican city and they don't think us white human beings for no longer something...My toddlers lives do not even come on the fringe of ways i replaced into raised and the probabilities I had...unhappy unhappy day in u . s . even as there is not any stability..
2016-10-15 03:00:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
One of my Senators already voted for the Amnesty bill so yes I and my entire family will be voting against him in the next election even though we know him personally.
2006-07-23 06:27:03 · answer #6 · answered by Garth B 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I would not vote my senator out of office. Before voting, I look at his/her political views on a a variety of subjects. This is one area that I specifically look for, but my view on the subject varies from yours. I would be looking for the senator which supports the bill and other items beneficial for Indiana.
2006-07-23 05:31:30 · answer #7 · answered by Mariposa 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would vote him out. They really need to be more strict with illegal immigrants. They come here and work for less so who is getting all the jobs. He really is showing that he isn't for Americans in that aspect.
2006-07-23 05:04:10 · answer #8 · answered by wildchick2201 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My candidate will not take such a hard line stance because it would alienate most of his base.
You may know a lot of people who feel the way you do, but collectively you share an extreme minority opinion. Nobody wants mass deportation, because they know what this would do to our infrastructure. Would you like paying $10 for a head of lettuce? I wouldn't, but would have to if union labor picked and boxed it instead of migrant farm labor. and that's just one tiny example of the impact.
2006-07-23 04:58:15 · answer #9 · answered by ratboy 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, we need our cheap labor and our drugs.
We have no one to blame, but ourselves, because, we as Americans take advantage of the cheap labor, it keeps costs down, so every time you go shopping or purchase a home, we are supporting illegals.
And as for drugs, we are one of the most drug addicted countries in the world. Its a bit hypocritical, wouldn't you say?
2006-07-23 05:02:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋