patrick.net

I'm all for it. Let them get a driver's license, after all a car rides a little differently from the donkey back home. And if I should ever get into an accident with one of them I would prefer to get paid by their insurance. Let them become legal so they can pay taxes to help paying down our deficit. Actually never mind that one, I forgot that the deficit will never be paid down, it only goes up. Just how house prices only go up. And if they don't, then the government does all it can to blow them up. Gas too. Everything goes up. Until it blows up. The only thing that never goes up is your stupid paycheck.

Undocumented = illegal.
Revenues = taxes.

Just clearing up some PC speak that is so prevalent today in the media.

And the Field Poll demonstrates once again it is a propaganda branch of the Great Socialist Paradise.

834 phone poll represents less than .0027 percent of the population.

It's well known that people who answer phone polls don't describe their true opinions, they try to "people please" the pollsters because they fear if they expose their true feelings that they might suffer retaliation of some sort, so they try to "read" the pollsters to give the most innocuous and politically correct response.

IDDQD says

I especially like this BS line about "pay back taxes". How exactly one goes about estimating "back taxes" for under-the-table all-cash income earned over a decade or so?

Is that US Back Taxes or Mexican Back taxes.. after all the "undocumented" workers were Mexican and other Latin American citizens who were (and are currently) under the jurisdiction of their governments including paying their fair share of income taxes for their govt back home.

I wonder if we should give them Swiss bank accounts... opps I mean US Bank Accounts.. to hide their wealth overseas (over the border)...

FortWayne says

Undocumented = illegal.

Revenues = taxes.

Just clearing up some PC speak that is so prevalent today in the media.

wait for govt of Mexico to send the bill to us for uncollected taxes earned by their citizens..

it will be the US Tax payer who will be paying it...

in 1994 with Prop 187 we voted to keep the invaders off the dole, to the tune of super-majority 70% of the vote. That did not matter to the progressive liberal activist court that blocked the voice of the people. But now, for some reason, whatever the now-heavily-mexican-majority wants is A-OK?? When did "majority" start to matter again in mexifornia???

friggin sickening

an article from 2 days ago...

Poll: Majority of US citizens say illegal immigrants should be deported.

http://news.msn.com/politics/poll-majority-of-us-citizens-say-illegal-immigrants-should-be-deported

Deporting all or most illegal immigrants drew 75 percent support from Republicans and 40 percent from Democrats.

WASHINGTON — More than half of U.S. citizens believe that most or all of the country's 11 million illegal immigrants should be deported, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released Wednesday that highlights the difficulties facing lawmakers trying to reform the U.S. immigration system.

The online survey shows resistance to easing immigration laws despite the biggest push for reform in Congress since 2007.

Thirty percent of those polled think that most illegal immigrants, with some exceptions, should be deported while 23 percent believe all illegal immigrants should be deported.

Only 5 percent believe all illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay in the U.S. legally, and 31 percent want most illegal immigrants to stay.

These results are in line with other polls in recent years, suggesting that people's views on immigration have not changed dramatically since the immigration debate reignited in Congress last month, according to Ipsos pollster Julia Clark.

"It's not Americans' views that are shifting. It is that the political climate is ripe for this discussion" after the November election when Hispanics voted overwhelmingly in favor of Democratic President Barack Obama, she said.

"Democrats feel that the time is right to capitalize on their wins, and Republicans feel that they had a bad blow and are eager to reach out to Hispanics," she added.

2013-1994= 19 years = voting age = all of the invader spawn are now voting age, and 85% of the females have reproduced, 55% of those more than once ... 75% of the total were out of wedlock. Prop 187 would have saved us, but now we are doomed.

from 1984 to 1994 the first amnesty resulted in a flood of invaders, but they wanted to be Americans. After 1994 they knew they did not have to bother being Ameircans, and they just came/come as roaches - living off the welfare, keeping the liberal dems in power in mexifornia, laughing all the way.

Bap33 says

2013-1994= 19 years = voting age = all of the invader spawn are now voting age, and 85% of the females have reproduced, 55% of those more than once ... 75% of the total were out of wedlock.

.. they are still citizens of Mexico regardless if they were born in the USA.. since their parents are legal citizens of Mexico and therefore by their own constitution .. born as Mexican citizens. Even more so since they are illegal and undocumented they fall under the Mexican constitution. Has any Congressman stated this ! or just not PC !

As such to this day.. none have renounced their citizenship to Mexico.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_nationality_law#Nationality_by_birth

Nationality by birth (According to the 30th article of the Constitution of Mexico, there are two ways in which a person can acquire the Mexican nationality, by birth and by naturalization)

The constitution declares that Mexicans by birth (born Mexicans) include the following:[1]

individuals born in Mexican territory regardless of the nationality of their parents;
individuals born abroad if one or both of their parents was a Mexican national born in Mexican territory;
individuals born abroad if one or both of their parents was a Mexican national by naturalization; and
individuals born in Mexican merchant or Navy ships or Mexican merchant or Army aircraft

Reagan the republican made amnesty cool and according to Cheney, proved that deficits don't matter.

lostand confused says

Reagan the republican made amnesty cool.

was that also written into the Mexican constitution.. guess i will have to look it up...

thomaswong.1986 says

lostand confused says

Reagan the republican made amnesty cool.

was that also written into the Mexican constitution.. guess i will have to look it up...

Why, are you now claiming Reagan was a Mexican?

lostand confused says

Why, are you now claiming Reagan was a Mexican?

you dont read well...

thomaswong.1986 says

lostand confused says

Why, are you now claiming Reagan was a Mexican?

you dont read well...

You don't make any sense, so the response is likewise.

lostand confused says

Reagan the republican made amnesty cool and according to Cheney, proved that deficits don't matter.

So whats the status of a Mexican nationalist born in the USA.

Whats changed ? did Reagans amnesty change anything in their Constitution modifying their citizen status.

what doesnt make sense ?

thomaswong.1986 says

So whats the status of a Mexican nationalist born in the USA.

Someone born in the USA is a US citizen-per our constitution.

lostand confused says

Someone born in the USA is a US citizen-per our constitution.

We do not have jurisdiction over Mexican citizens per their and our own laws...
no.. not everyone born in the USA is a US citizen.. since they were NOT
registered as being here to begin with.. and therefore under foreign jurisdiction. Our Constitution repeatedly talks of jurisdictions.. read it some time...

As is the case of some traveler passing through the US from one end to another.. say Mexico to Canada doesnt mean their newborn is automatic US Citizen.

unless you are ready to arbitrarily kidnap foreign nationalists and strip them of their
inalienable rights they were born with..... so they can vote for your party!

some real extreme case of voter fraud wouldnt you say...

thomaswong.1986 says

since they were NOT
registered as being here to begin with.. and therefore
under foreign jurisdiction. Our Constitution repeatedly talks of jurisdictions..
read it some time...

Why is it that tea party types love to wallow in ignorance and then quote the constitution-making such a mockery of it. Or do you just enjoy trolling. How on earth does Mexico have jurisdiction on US soil?? Now if it were an embassy or certain places-like where McCain was born in Panama-yes that is considered soveriegn territory. But otherwise Mexico does not have jurisdiction in the US.

Are you now claiming that if a Mexican citizen is wanted there and he flees to the USA, then Mexican police and army can cross over here and arrest him?? Mexico's jurisdiction ends in Mexico-end of matter. The USA may be obligated by the treaties they have signed-but again it is an option/agreement and vice versa.

Sigh...

Now on the other hand, if the US does not have birth right citizenship-then they would not be citizens. Some European countries have that-where at least one parent is required to be a citizen-for the child to be a citizen. Else, even if you are born there, you are not a citizen and that is the law. Japan is quite similar in that regard I believe.

lostand confused says

Why is it that tea party types love to wallow in ignorance and then quote the constitution-making such a mockery of it. Or do you just enjoy trolling. How on earth does Mexico have jurisdiction on US soil?? Now if it were an embassy or certain places-like where McCain was born in Panama-yes that is considered soveriegn territory. But otherwise Mexico does not have jurisdiction in the US.

sorry charlie.. not a Tea Party member! but have best wishes for them.

again.. so some research before spouting off the dead end...

The same what is true with US citizens who have a birth overseas.. the child is citizen of the US. It need not be considered soveriegn territory.

has been true since 1790...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790

"the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens".

it is still true today...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_nationality_law#Birth_abroad_to_two_United_States_citizens

lostand confused says

Are you now claiming that if a Mexican citizen is wanted there and he flees to the USA, then Mexican police and army can cross over here and arrest him?? Mexico's jurisdiction ends in Mexico-end of matter. The USA may be obligated by the treaties they have signed-but again it is an option/agreement and vice versa.

Sigh...

did you bother to ready up their constitution regarding birth to mexican citizens ?

I will repost..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_nationality_law#Nationality_by_birth

Nationality by birth (According to the 30th article of the Constitution of Mexico, there are two ways in which a person can acquire the Mexican nationality, by birth and by naturalization)

The constitution declares that Mexicans by birth (born Mexicans) include the following:[1]

individuals born in Mexican territory regardless of the nationality of their parents;
individuals born abroad if one or both of their parents was a Mexican national born in Mexican territory;
individuals born abroad if one or both of their parents was a Mexican national by naturalization; and
individuals born in Mexican merchant or Navy ships or Mexican merchant or Army aircraft

robertoaribas says

thomaswong.1986 says

We do not have jurisdiction over Mexican citizens per their and our own laws...


no.. not everyone born in the USA is a US citizen

The supreme court has already decided they are, so dipstick wong is wrong again... like usual.

and your source is ?

Some people have no citizenship because the country they were bored in doesn't give citizenship.

Their parents' country doesn't give citizenship if you don't bore on its land.

lostand confused says

Now if it were an embassy or certain places-like where McCain was born in Panama-yes that is considered soveriegn territory

actually not the case until 1937 regarding citizenship. it wasnt sovereign territory..perhaps not even the Philippine bases were either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_Canal_Zone#Citizenship

robertoaribas says

thomaswrong: the child can choose, as both countries have laws granting the child citizenship.

mr wrong: are you too stupid or lazy to look up the relevant case law?

here, I'll help:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause#Court_decisions

and you pull up a case of which the parents who were registered US permanent residents.. who legally entered the US who had a child within the borders legally.

this is different from both current laws for both Mexican Citizens and US laws
concerning illegal residents... else why do we deport them back ?

Bap33 says

all of the invader spawn

....oh and yes they do multiply like roaches

But I suppose others are seemingly content with criminal migration in this country .... that speaks volumes of character in itself

robertoaribas says

mr wrong: are you too stupid or lazy to look up the relevant case law?

it seems your the one wrong.. but no surprise there!

The whole idea of making some human beings "illegal" is absurd. Our rights are born with us when are born as human beings, not granted by government. The government simply has no say over who is "illegal" for being; our rights should not be defined by bureaucratic documents. There should be no "status" except for everyone being equal in front of the law. There is Constitutional prohibition against rank and title.

From a practical perspective, laws that ban "illegal" human beings are bound to be even harder to enforce and would require even more cumbersome and costly bureaucracy than war on "illegal" drugs . . . because human beings are even more mobile than drugs: human beings have legs and can move themselves without help. Any law or bureaucracy to seriously enforce against that natural right mobility is bound to be extremely intrusive to people who seek to benefit from the superior status of being "legal" to begin with.

robertoaribas says

Yeah. calling people "invader spawn" and "cockroaches" not only makes you a raving racist,

what do you call the so called Coyote smugglers...who kill and rape their prey...

how about we call it "human trafficking" much of it with huge loans to pay off
either with criminal activity like drug smuggling and prostitution within our borders.

Its a global problem.. be it Africa, Asia, Europe or North America.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_smuggling

Picture of smuggled persons deported and brought back to Pakistan. Picture belongs to Ansar Burney Trust - but I can use it can be used as long as credit is given to them.

Human trafficking and sex slavery in human trafficking are largely the result of government laws against migration. The enslavement usually consists of taking away the document paper. The dynamics of human trafficking is very similar to drug trafficking: prohibition leads to criminality.

Reality says

The whole idea of making some human beings "illegal" is absurd.

People smuggling between the United States and Mexico is a booming business that, as of 2003, garnered over $5 billion a year.[8] Similarly, in the EU, profits from people smuggling operations is estimated to be around €4 billion per year.

People smuggling is a dangerous operation and has frequently resulted in the death of those individuals being smuggled. In 2004, 464 recorded deaths took place during the crossing from Mexico to the United States, and each year, an estimated 2000 people drown in the Mediterranean on the journey from Africa into Europe.[9]

Human trafficking and sex slavery in human trafficking are largely the result of government laws against migration. The enslavement usually consists of taking away the document paper. The dynamics of human trafficking is very similar to drug trafficking: prohibition is the cause of criminality.

robertoaribas says

robertoaribas

The modern day slave trade !! acceptable to allow slavery to exist in the USA !!

where is your Progressive Outrage over this immortality as our Borders are Invaded

with this immoral practice and bondage over your brother and sisters !!!

Where would our country be without the inherent contribution from our prison industrial complex

Study Shows Sharp Rise in Latino Federal Convicts

Latino convicts now represent the largest ethnic population in the federal prison system, accounting for 40 percent of those convicted of federal crimes,
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/19/us/19immig.html

thomaswong.1986 says

The modern day slave trade !! acceptable to allow slavery to exist in the USA !!

where is your Progressive Outrage over this immortality as our Borders are Invaded

with this immoral practice and bondage over your brother and sisters !!!

It is not invasion because the arriving do not seek political overlordship over the existing population.

Slavery in human trafficking is largely the result of laws against migration that strips natural rights from migrants and place them in a lower and vulnerable legal status. That's why the typical slavers take away the victims' "papers" and threaten to call the police as their enforcers.

The sad thing is that, just as libertarians argued for a long time that slavery would be hard to enforce without slave-return laws enforced by the government, the immigration police is being used by the slavers and human traffickers as slave-return service.

Reality says

The sad thing is that, just as libertarians argued for a long time that slavery would be hard to enforce without slave-return laws enforced by the government, the immigration police is being used by the slavers and human traffickers as slave-return service.

that leaves .. building a freaking tall strong wall and policing our borders to stop this.

thomaswong.1986 says

that leaves .. building a freaking tall strong wall and policing our borders to stop this.

Neither the wall nor the staff to patrol it is free.

The real solution is: reducing welfare, combined with free migration! If the migrant worker knows he/she can come back easily the next time, then he/she is far more likely to voluntarily move back to Mexico (or whatever other country) during our recession, to spend more time with his/her family in a place where cost of living is lower. When the next time our economy is booming, more labor is needed, they can come back to build more houses or whatever else. This easy migration policy would also shunt out the "illegal"/legally unemployable youth from becoming foot soldiers to gangs just to make a living and stay in this country.

robertoaribas says

It isn't a CRIMINAL act to be here illegally,

LOL! lovely! see the deportations made by mexico on their southern borders...

Not to mention that new tall fench with barbs they are putting up manned with troops.

Guess the Mexican are racists too i guess sending all those illegals back home...

no talk in Mexico about 'pathway to citizenship" or "amnesty"

You can pretty much see many other nations making sure illegal criminal activity is stopped.

robertoaribas says

make a reasonable policy for immigrants, and 99% of the human smuggling goes away.

we have a reasonable immigration policy that has worked well over the years... and many from all over the world have filed their paper work and will enter legally.

robertoaribas says

50% of illegal immigrants overstay a visa. They came in legally... and just didn't leave. How does your wall stop that?

I would stick a $500 bounty on their head.. could create a great new industry...

Alive of course.. $500 collected from the illegal immigrant captured. Not taxpayer funded.

'Bounty hunters' hired to track down illegal immigrants
More than 170,000 immigrants refused leave to stay in Britain are to be tracked down by private-sector “bounty hunters”.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9551180/Bounty-hunters-hired-to-track-down-illegal-immigrants.html

The support services firm Capita will earn up to £40million if it finds all of the migrants identified by the UK Border Agency who may be living in the country illegally.

But it was claimed by MPs that the company will be “laughing all the way to the bank” as its four-year contract does not specify how many people it has to remove.

Rob Whiteman, chief executive of UKBA, told the Home Affairs Select Committee: “The contract is on payment by results, where they will make contact with potential overstayers from our records.

“The potential value of the contract, if they performed very well over a four-year period, would be around £40 million.