Why is it that the most common sense approach to grappling with the immigration problem that I’ve seen comes from a RedState blogger… and not a Senator or the teeming Senate staff that buzz around writing “clay pigeons” in the dark of night? Maybe it is because sometimes (if not all the time) We, The People “get it”.
We Want Latinos In The GOP – St. Louis Conservative at RedState.com
While I agree that this bill is not a good one and shouldn’t become law, we need to tone down the rhetoric and instead propose our own, principled bill that will work. I propose:
1. Secure the border and institute tamper proof employer emforcement provisions with REAL ID.
2. Offer a period for illegals to come forward and declare that they are here. Those with no criminal background and solid work history can apply for a probationary visa. If they elect to pursue citizenship, they can reapply for their visa when it expires without going home. There would then be a significant time period and several hurdles to pass through to eventually become citizens. Those who don’t elect to pursue citizenship can receive a probationary visa (if they are law-abiding and are gainfully employed), but it is temporary and they must “touch back” every few years or so. Further, make English the national language and make learning it a requirement for a green card or citizenship.
3. Introduce a merit system that encourages high-skilled and highly-educated immigration and puts those immigrants on a fast track.
4. Institute a guest worker program for low-skilled labor needs such as agriculture.
It’s funny to me that the same people who say that people who are against this bill are “anti-Hispanic” also say that these Hispanics are here doing jobs “Americans won’t do”. That, to me, is the height of racism, for by that statement, they basically say that these are crappy jobs and we need second-class citizens (the Hispanics) to do them. I LIKE Hispanic people, and I want them to come here and be upwardly mobile, not relegated to cleaning bathrooms all their life. Yet that is what this bill encourages. It’s not right, and it doesn’t benefit Hispanics in the long term.
Well, this can’t possibly work — it is common sense and simple. No wonder no one in Washington, DC came up with it!
St. Louis Conservative argues his approach is good policy because it is good politics — bringing Hispanics into the GOP. Frankly, I could care less about the political argument. I think St. Louis Con’s approach is good — because it is the right thing to do!
**Amnesty Watch GP programming note** I’ll be waiting stranded punished on a US Airways flight back to Charlotte this morning. So I won’t be able to catch up on the cloture vote until it is probably over. Please use this space to keep each other up-to-date on the vote. And someone please tell me how Sen. Richard John Kerry Burr votes!
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
I like it. It sounds like Amnesty to me.
#1: Yeah, it sounds like it makes it easier for those who are here illegally to get citizenship. Call it “open arms amnesty.”
Here’s my version:
1- Close the border! This isn’t just necessary to “plug the leak before you bail the boat”, it’s also desperately needed to prove to the American people that the government is finally serious about national security. Twelve feet of concrete, well patrolled, may not stop 100% of all illegals, but it WILL cut down on their numbers far more than any “virtual” fence ever could. As an added bonus, it’d also make drug smuggling a lot tougher.
2- Cull the black sheep. Any illegal with a prior criminal history here or in in his original country gets (an additional) 20 years of hard labor… and then gets sent back home. Eventually, we’ll be wanting to make a path to citizenship for the illegals still here; but we won’t want to be sharing our nation with MS-13, and we DO want to be able to convince existing Americans that their new countrymen really are good citizens.
3- Drain the swamp. Eliminate ALL federal assistance for ‘Sanctuary’ cities. Make federal law enforcement funding conditional on municipal police (and hospitals- we’ve already had several outbreaks of tuberculosis directly attributable to infected illegal immigrants) maintaning good records of the immigration status of the citizens they come into contact with.
4- Close the store. Apply serious enforcement of employer-verification laws, with actual jail time for convictions. “Hit them in their wallets” is a dated saying; many big employers have deep enough pockets to shrug off even massive fines. The number of people willing to spend five years inside so that they can hire Juan for three dollars an hour is far more limited. Use IRS auditors; they have the backrgound and it’ll give them something to do besides harassing law-abiding citizens.
5- Open the doors. After a few years of the enhanced enforcement discussed above, public confidence may have improved enough that you can start talking about creating a citizenship process. Make citizenship the only legitimate way to stay… every other nation that has tried a guest worker program has lived to regret it, and two of the biggest experimenters (Germany and France) are scrapping theirs.
I’m always willing to welcome new citizens, just as I’m always willing to welcome guests into my house. In the same fashion, though, I must insist on my guests being INVITED in and on behaving properly once they’re here.
Bruce, the (sh)amnesty vote failed 53-46. I am trying to find out how Sen. Burr voted.
Mission accomplished.
Regards,
Peter H.
More details.
And now to start pounding it into people that we already know what the Nancy Pelosi and Ted Kennedy Democrats will do — if they ever gain the power to do it.
Bruce, Senator Burr voted NO on cloture. Your lobbying and efforts paid off.
Here’s the list of roll call votes.
Regards,
Peter H.
From NDT’s article – Bush doesn’t get it:
Umm… excuse me, but there is a gigantic piece of common ground out there with the support of 50-80% of Americans of both parties… it’s called “Secure the Borders”.
Apparently you didn’t look too hard, W.
OT but Scooter has a Bureau of Prisons inmate number. heh-heh.
NDT, the next item up for bid is the attempt to re implement the Fairness Doctrine. They will push very hard for that as they can’t stand being held accountable by the voters – they only seem to care about the wishes of
their constituents. er, the people who mark the ballots when they are up for election and want our vote. Their constituent are the big money contributors who pay for their lavish lifestyles and thus have the most influence on how they vote.PS. Not that there’s anything wrong with a lavish lifestyle, I want one. I’m just not willing to become a whore to achieve it.
Oh, and don’t be surprised if some type of internet legislation similar to the FD comes down the pike.
SF (#10, #11) – You hit the nail on the head. The Dems can’t apply the “Fairness” Doctrine to talk radio without blogs being in the crosshairs too.
So fine… I’ll let a Kossack be a “revolving blogpatriot” if I can be a contributor over there!*
*when Satan drinks iced tea, of course
LOL…..well, you could add me. Remember, most gays think I’m “dangerous to the interests of gay people”; that would likely fix the imbalance.
Wow, NDT. The Malcontent guys sure are gutless.
Sometimes I think you overdo it …but… jeez! The Malcontents invited you over and over to explain yourself – in abusive style, with one personal attack after another from Matt and Robbie. You merely obliged them, and more politely than they on average.
They are fully within their rights to run their blog how they want, of course, but jeez. I guess they can’t handle disagreement.
(i.e., when the person disagreeing with them is capable of scoring some actual points on them)
ILC, it sounds like the “(un)Fairness Doctrine” to me.
Typical libtard reasoning: when you can’t win the debate, make certain there is no debate. That is what the resurgence of the Fairness Doctrine is all about.
Fortunately for us, we have Rep. Mike Pence to thank for cutting the Dhimmicrats off at the pass.
Regards,
Peter H.
Wow, NDT…. I didn’t know you had earned such a badge of distinction!
I’d love to add “the most dangerous gay conservative” to my list of insults.
I’m quite jealous!
Peter, I don’t think the Malcontents (Matt / Robbie) normally qualify as libtards. But I can see your point. When they’re feeling insecure, they act as if they were libtards.
That’s right; kneel and worship the bitch goddess. 🙂
Seriously, though, guys, cut Matt and Robbie a little slack. You all know me a lot better than they do, and frankly, I was both abrasive and aggressive towards them in those posts; on several levels, even though I thought it was unfair, I also can understand why they reacted that way to me. GP, GPW, and ILC know I’m not some kind of screaming fanatic thanks to personal experience; they don’t.
Plus, if anything, the banning has been a valuable experience; it’s taught me that there are times when you simply don’t need to win a battle that badly. Matt and Robbie are good guys; it would have been better to give them the benefit of the doubt, say my piece, and retire, rather than recreating the March to the Sea.
And who knows? Evidently they’re considering undoing it (poll in the upper right corner), although the vote is split at this point.
NDT, nice of you to defend them but I read the thread! 🙂 Yes, you were relentless, but so were they. What’s worse, they made personal attacks on you long before you did on them. They did not respond to your points. It just paints an ugly picture of who they turn into, when they feel insecure or challenged. That’s my judgment, from what I saw. I know they are good writers otherwise – and actually, I’ve agreed with most of the articles I’ve seen from them.
It just paints an ugly picture of who they turn into, when they feel insecure or challenged.
We all have our Rosie O’Donnell moments.
Some of us more than others, but that’s all they are….moments.
Just keep in mind, friend ILC, that I tend to be almost obsessively prone to pointing the finger at myself first when things go awry; I’m just trying to ensure fairness and that your glimpses of my skirt are not excessively affecting your judgment. 🙂
“We all have our Rosie O’Donnell moments.
Some of us more than others, but that’s all they are….moments.”
That explains a lot of things coming out of the mouths of libtrolls at the moment.
Regards,
Peter H.