Wouldn't you like to hear JUST ONE of the Presidential candidates tell it like it is about illegal immigration

Question

I'd like to hear one of them come out and say that the reason that there are so many poor Mexicans migrating here is political corruption in Mexico. I'd like to hear just one of them say that if the Mexican government doesn't get their act together we might just have to engage in a little nation building close to home. The Mexican government is corrupt. The Mexican elite are greedy. They have no reason to do anything, because they know the US will take care of their poor. Well I want to hear a political candidate come out and tell it like it is. Wouldn't you?

http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/DATASTATISTICS/0,,contentMDK:20399244~menuPK:1504474~pagePK:64133150~piPK:64133175~theSitePK:239419,00.html
Data - Quick Reference Tables

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/322239_richest04.html
World's richest? Gates may have cashed it in

http://money.cnn.com/2007/08/03/news/international/carlosslim.fortune/
Carlos Slim, the richest man in the world - Aug. 6, 2007

Barney, I personally have explained it many times on this very forum, but I'll try to do it one more time.
Illegal labor drives down the wages of American citizens. It is baloney that illegals only do the jobs that Americans "don't want to do". Ask anyone in the housing construction industry.
If we continue to import cheap labor, we're not changing what caused the Mexican poverty to begin with. We're only increasing the possibility that one day the working class in the US will be more like the working class in Mexico. We should be helping them to improve their lives where they live.
I realize that some people will never accept any reason on this issue. I hope you are not one of those people.

Thanks Skid, at least he didn't call me a racist.
That in and of itself is progress.

spirit, I commend Tancredo for his efforts. But has he ever said that he would tell the Mexican government that they have to get it together or we would go as far as supporting an insurgency in Mexico? I would. It's time to take the gloves off.

Answer 1

The Mexican elite are very, very wealthy. I stayed with a political family in Mexico while I was an exchange student, and, they took world cruises every summer, had a servants home larger than my home in the US, and were afforded all luxuries- including Dolce & Gabbana, etc....

Our government does what it wants to do. It hasn't much cared about us for some time. I am more concerned about the "bigger picture" of what they are trying to get accomplished here......

Answer 2

Illegal immigration is really a non issue for both parties. The Democrats want 'em in because they see them as an expanding base for power. (eg: the Sanchez election in So. California where it was found that some non citizens were voting for her: clearly election fraud, but not pursued diligently enough.) As long as a workforce can be exploited, the Democrats will use that.

The Republicans want a cheap labor pool. Thirty years ago a construction worker in the US could live pretty well. Now the same job pays less on a per hour basis. Combine that with the inflation since then and you're in food stamp territory. Whatever jobs cannot be outsourced overseas will be outsourced in-country by an underground workforce.

Both parties, while not really in collusion to bring this situation about, are attempting to exploit it for short term gains. All pretty cowardly really.

Answer 3

help illegals? Neither! they're the two attentive to the outcomes of letting greater illegals in. they might furnish amnesty for people who're already interior the country yet letting new unlawful immigrants into the country isn't their activity and that i don't see amnesty happening interior the close to destiny the two. So i might fairly say those elections won't (and should not) be approximately and for the pastimes of unlawful immigrants. To "positioned on a happy face": unlawful immigrants are actually not blanketed interior the present immigration coverage and it is not purely because of the fact politicians do not decide for them to yet they simply won't be able to provided that all human beings is familiar with they exist yet in a suitable way they don't look to be there. So how ought to anyone make particular how they're knowledgeable and how plenty jobs they take? they don't look to be a ingredient of any surveys and the census. you won't be able to plot a software for people who won't be able to even look in front of the government because of the fact of their unlawful status. Amnesty is something that's not basic to accomplish besides and then what might U.S. voters think of and how might criminal extraterrestrial beings experience after waiting for an basic visa for 5-10 years? There are nonetheless greater legals than illegals...that should even deliver approximately a brilliant revolution provided that lot of voters and legals are against illegals.

Answer 4

You are right about the corruption in Mexico and just about every country. The US is just as responsible. We can take this situation all the way back to the days of NATIVE AMERICANS on this land of ours. Where are 'they' now - relegated to parcels of land that our government has restricted them. If you read history, we have been just as greedy and wanton in our quest to obtain. We have tricked people into boarding ships and making these US their homes and then allowing them freedom with a promise that was not delivered - and those who were lucky to get a parcel of land - the 'law' was reversed so they would have nothing afterall. We don't take care of our own poor. We allow every immigrant to come here, borrow money they don't have to repay to open businesses they don't pay taxes on, and those of us who live here, were born here, can't get a student scholarships to attend college even with a 4.0, graduated 12 in a class of 471 students! It is outrageous when I think about the candidates who are running. I know most of them are 'talkers'. The ones who would possibly be rightfully considered, would probably not make it.

When I consider in 14 years the influx of the Hispanics in our community it is overwhelming. What is so odd is that 1) they remain separate in their own groups 2) I have taught many students who have told me they do not have a legal social security number - and yet - they are in our public schools. I would like to hear not only the candidates 'come out and tell it like it is' - we are Americans - and have a right to make demands upon our government.

Answer 5

I don't care for illegal immigration. Legal is fine and there is an insane backlog of legal immigrants waiting to come here. Sometimes it can take 20 years. Where is that reform? I don't want 12 million illegals to be given amnesty. Don't tell me they all feel political or religious persecution. It's not fair to those of us here and those who went through proper channels. There will be more stalemates in this debate because the issue is too touchy. Financially, we cannot send 12-20 million illegals back to their country. That would cost billions. So what is the solution? I'm afraid there is no good answer.

Answer 6

I admit that my answer to your question is only sort of "on point."

What I want for JUST ONE candidate to talk about is not just the issue of illegal immigration, but also (and to me this is more important) to talk about how the U.S. Supreme Court once handled the issue of illegal immigration. I want for a candidate to talk about how important it is that mistakes like this one should never happen again.

Have you ever heard of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982)?

The state of Texas had created a law (May 1975) requiring that all children enrolled in the public schools be either U.S. citizens or legal immigrants -- prohibiting illegals. A little more than two years later a lawsuit was filed in Tyler, TX challenging the law as a violation of the 14th Amendment's guarantee of the equal protection of the laws. All three levels of the federal courts came to the same basic conclusion -- the law is unconstitutionally discriminatory. The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling was by a narrow margin, 5 to 4, with Justice Brennan writing the majority opinion, for himself and Justices Blackmun, Marshall, Powell, and Stevens. (In previous cases, Justices Blackmun and Powell had taken the view that the state may constitutionally ban legal immigrants from jobs as police officers (Foley v. Connelie, 435 U.S. 291 (1978)) and that getting an education is not a constitutionally guaranteed fundamental right (San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1 (1973)).) My "favorite" (note the sarcasm) part of Brennan's opinion for the Court is, "It is difficult to understand precisely what the State hopes to achieve by promoting the creation and perpetuation of a subclass of illiterates within our boundaries, surely adding to the problems and costs of unemployment, welfare, and crime." What a swell job of understanding the motives of the Texas legislature.

Six years after the Plyler decision, Professor David P. Currie, writing a two-volume text called "The Constitution in the Supreme Court," had harsh words for this particular decision. He wrote, "With all due respect, this is carrying solicitude a little far. Public resources are scarce and those who have no business being here can have poor claim on them. I may have a right to keep a burglar out of my house, the Court appears to be saying, but once he is there I must invite him to dinner."

Answer 7

I'd like to hear JUST ONE candidate admit publicly that it is the fault of the US gvmt. and citizens that illegal immigration continues to be an issue. If we hadnt invited these ppl here and continued to supply jobs and other services for the last 30 yrs or so, we wouldnt have this problem. But as long as teh gvmt. refuses to acknowledge & fix the problem that is dividing this nation, then the waves of illegal immigrants will continue. Yes, Mexico's gvmt. is extremely corrupt, but the US gvmt. hasnt done anything to resolve the problem either. If illegal immigration was as bad as the media makes it out to be, then the problem would've been resolved many yrs ago.

Answer 8

Tancredo, Ron Paul, and Hunter have the most conservative voting records on immigration.
http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez08_gop2.html
http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez08_gop3.html
http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez08_gop1.html

Of these three, Ron Paul has the best chance of winning the Primary election.
Paul's campaign has almost 5 times as much money to spend as Tancredo.
http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C00432914.html
http://query.nictusa.com/pres/2007/Q2/C00431619.html

The NAFTA Superhighway might be another significant threat to American borders.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBmFrYWPoG8
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul349.html

Answer 9

Isn't it time people stop coming out that illegals work for less money than US citizens,that is a crock of $hit,the reason they can live on that is because the american taxpayers make up the difference by paying for the illegals' free health care,housing,welfare and schooling,while places that employ illegals keep stressing that by using illegals they pass on the savings into american consumers,what they fail to declare is that the taxpayers of this country are stuck with the bills,once they leave the front door of the work place,they let the taxpayers take over,that is not counting the thousands of crimes caused by illegals against US citizens, they found out by working the system it's better to be in jail in a US prison than free in their own country

Answer 10

Tom Tancredo is the only candidate against illegal immigration and increasing the numerous guest worker programs like H1-B.