So Much For These Cheesebag Democrats Being Tough On Terror
From the AYFKM?!?! Files
By haystack Posted in 2008 | Democrats | Immigration — Comments (43) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
I'm busy tonight...lots to do. I wanted to mind my own business until I find out there was a Democrat debate today sponsored by that harbinger of independent broadcast journalism, National Public Radio.
So, I skim the piece in the NYT, and I come across this:
If there is one issue that has perplexed presidential candidates from both parties in Iowa this year, it is immigration. The Democratic presidential contenders were confronted with it an unusual way at a debate here this afternoon: Should an American citizen turn in someone they know to be an illegal immigrant?
Now, if you are a Republican, you can probably answer this with a straight face. If you're a Democrat, you are likely finding yourself already tying yourself up in knots searching for the right way to twist this all around into some sort of complicated concoction of logic...that's the way YOUR Prez wannabes handled it anyway...
More below the fold...
The rest of the extract:
The answer, for most of the candidates, in the end, was no. But the question, presented in various forms during a two-hour National Public Radio debate, produced strained conversation as the candidates sought to balance conflicting emotions and political forces on an issue that looms both in the coming caucuses and primaries and in the general election.
"We are not going to deputize a whole bunch of American citizens to start grabbing people or turning them in," said Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, who was the first to answer the question at the debate, the first this year staged without a television camera in the room. "The ordinary American citizen may not know whether or not this person is illegal or not."
Mr. Obama, followed by other Democrats, argued, that tracking down illegal immigrants was the job of the government. But the moderators — sometimes playing taped questions from listeners — pressed the candidates on what they suggested were inconsistencies during a debate that promised an extended discussion on just three topics: Immigration, Iran and China.
"If a citizen witnessed some other kind of crime, wouldn’t you want them to report it?" Steve Inskeep of NPR asked Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York after she said that did not think that citizens should be "enforcing the broken laws of our federal immigration system."
"It’s a very clever question, Steve, but I think it really begs the question," Mrs. Clinton responded. "What we’re looking at here is 12 to 14 million people — they live in our neighborhoods, they take care of our elderly, they probably made the beds in the hotels that some of us stayed in last night. They are embedded in our society. If we want to listen to the demagogues and the calls for us to being to round up people and turn every American into a suspicious vigilante, I think we will do graver harm to the fabric of our nation than any kind of person-by-person reporting of someone who might be here illegally."
Representative Dennis Kucinich of Ohio said, "We don’t encourage vigilantism in this country."
Umm, let's see. If I see suspicious behavior, such as a person laying a duffle bag full of pipe bombs at the entrance of a shopping mall, I should report it. Right? Check.
I see someone pull up in front of a Federal building in a Ryder truck full of dynamite...report it? Check.
See someone walking away from a vehicle in a parking garage under the World Trade Center that seems to be in an awful big hurry to get the heck outta Dodge...call 911? Check.
No vigilantism so far.
See someone who appears to be tucking Grandma into her bed at the Nursing home that can't speak English and gets paid cash...oops...don't call anyone-you're just over-reacting and are just being a racist vigilante because of the evil Federal(read Republican) Government's failure to find a way to give them amnesty.
Are you (expletive deleted in deference to the posting guidelines) kidding me?
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Sand Bagging Romney — Comments (64) »
So Much For These Cheesebag Democrats Being Tough On Terror 43 Comments (0 topical, 43 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
first-Romney is not my candidate, but foremost...nowhere has Romney suggested that people who report illegals to the authorities are vigilantes...nor has he ever suggested that reporting anyone for suspicion of committing a crime might require we first deputize everyone...keep up please.
ps-did I mention that Romney is not my guy?
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
... should be able to vote, claim welfare benefits as well as in-state tuition fees, you should really not be feigning outrage at this - it makes you look idiotic.
Contrary to popular belief, we Republicans don't go around demanding documentation of every Hispanic we see, which apparently the Boston Globe, a high profile member of the Massachusetts Democrat Party, does.
In fact, if a Republican had done what the Boston Globe did, you'd be crapping your pants screaming "racist!!"
PS: No. As Romney did, we generally ask them nicely to stop the first time ... and if they don't, and we discover it, we fire them. Or is it all that Lefty bloviation about second chances only applies to murderers, armed robbers and rapists?
A Democrat's claim of concern about border security and law enforcement is about as sincere as his support for the troops.
who was here as an exchange student (from Germany). He ended up staying here longer than he was legal. Eventually he married his American girlfriend and wants to become an American citizen.
There isn't a chance in hell I'd have turned him in.
they weren't asked whether they would look the other way when they saw someone they liked committing a crime they didn't think was such a big deal.
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
But I'm not even going to get into answering it. I'll sum it up by saying I couldn't possibly disagree with you any more than I do.
Problem is thats all it is. A little linguistic legerdemain that lets you not think about the results of your position.
I'm sure Alger Hiss's friends felt the same way
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
That person was here illegally. And the commenter wouldn't turn them in... like most Americans.
Your post makes this outrage sound sincere, but that only makes me more surprised. Most people don't expect to "turn in" their friends who entered illegally any more than the commenter above.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
Again the issue of illegal immigration comes down to where on the spectrum from jaywalking to murder you think illegal entry fits.
Do you turn in every jaywalker you know? Every speeder?
Everyone agrees that if an illegal immigrant commits other greater crimes, then swift action should be taken.
The harder question for some is those who have otherwise followed the law but entered illegally. Should people treat them as jaywalkers, robberies, or murderers?
All of your examples suggest you see illegal entry as similar to acts of terrorism. Personally I see it closer to jaywalking in that it is not enforced and does no direct personal harm to others. So in my worldview, no I would not automatically assume I would report someone who came into the country illegally if they were otherwise an upstanding citizen (ditto jaywalkers, people who don't charge sales tax at a lemonade stand, and DC residents who keep a firearm for their protection).
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
To compare entering the country illegally to work (assuming no other illegal activity) to planting a bomb in a public place is hands down the most ridiculous thing I've read today.
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
not paying taxes on earned income...I suggest those are other illegal activities. I know if an American were found using someone else's SS and not paying taxes that they will go to jail for fraud. I want' to be like an illegal and never pay taxes also and just get a tut tut from the government, don't you?
I personally when I had financial difficulties a few years back would have loved a new SS# to "clear" my credit. guess what no such luck and I had to work it out myself. If I had been illegal no problem I can use..I don't know..your number? It doesn't matter does it? They are just hard working people doing the work American's won't do, huh?
Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion
forgery and identity theft. The Democratic leadership clearly is on board with these crimes, along with too many Republicans. The rank and file of both parties don't buy into it, though. Fortunately, our party likely will be purged of this pro-criminality mindset soon.
Adam C wrote : "Personally I see [illegal immigration] closer to jaywalking in that it is not enforced and does no direct personal harm to others.
Which reminded me of something I once heard : "No single drop of rain thinks it's to blame for the flood."
“Religion and good morals are the only solid foundation of public liberty and happiness.” — Samuel Adams
The average "jaywalking" household probably isn't a net cost to the country of $20K per household per year. Low-skilled immigrant households are.
It's like seeing termites eating away at your house and simply ignoring them. If you ignore them long enough, the house will fall down around you.
That's an argument against immigration, not against illegal entry. Thus it's not really relevant. Most legal immigrants are poorer than average and low-skilled. Hench the whole land of opportunity thing.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
You said: "Personally I see it closer to jaywalking in that it is not enforced and does no direct personal harm to others."
If the average low-skilled immigrant household (and almost all illegal immigrants fit this mold) costs the country $20K/household/year, then it isn't comparable to jaywalking. Their very presence here costs all of us.
I would hope that fiscal conservatives wouldn't ignore or overlook this obvious point.
I'm not real impressed with its successors. Which would translate to as "no."
But then, I'm a pro-amnesty squish*. What's the Democrats' excuse?
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
*Albeit one who thinks that we need a proper fence and border security system first.
"Albeit one who thinks that we need a proper fence and border security system first."
Heh.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
And I agree with 'stack; they were looking for votes.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
When they commit discrete illegal acts that are also illegal for citizens, that;s a different story. Nab 'em and show them the border!
Speaking of the border, it's over a year since Congress authorized part of the fence. Any news, Mr. President?
Comparing a Spanish speaking worker with the scenarios you posted is a huge reach. See if you can pick out what doesn't fit.
A. A person laying a duffle bag full of pipe bombs at the entrance of a shopping mall.
B. A Spanish speaking employee at a nursing home, who for some odd reason you've made it your business to know that he is being paid in cash (how I don't know, were you snooping around in the nursing home companies books, did you do something illegal I should be reporting YOU for?).
C. Someone in a Ryder truck full of dynamite...
I said someone that doesn't speak english.
I live in Texas-don't hurl the anti-Mexican innuendo my way-there are more Hispanic Americans than Anglos where I live, and we get on just fine.
There are plenty of non-english speaking people here who speak a language other than spanish-I have yet to hear of a Mexican terrorist.
The point remains-you care who is here illegally and make things right by the law, or you flip your nose at the laws you think were silly to begin with. Either way, the question was whether people should report suspicions of a crime(being here illegally) and they said no...not only that, they said citizens were not going to be deputized(implied none of us were capable of such a responsibility in the first place), and those who would bother themselves over reporting illegal aliens were nothing short of vigilantes.
You LIKE being deprived of your Citizens' rights to participate and engage local law enforcement in helping the community be safe and secure?
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
we all have the right to report illegal behavior. For example I could follow you around all day and call the police every time you jaywalk or perform a rolling stop.
And if you are going to compare an illegal worker to someone with a truck full of pipe bombs, it is more than fair to also compare an illegal working to your jaywalking.
I should also report you for snooping in the nursing company's books.
if you consider reporting jaywalking to be a waste of your time, then you deem yourself an adequate arbiter of which laws are important and which are not. Have your fun.
The terrorists who pulled off 911 were here illegally, and if we knew then what we know now, the flight training schools would have reported them...at the very least SOMEONE might have reported them as having been here illegally.
When you take it upon yourself to decide which laws matter and which ones don't, then haven't you defacto deputized yourself?
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
How do people get the information they need, in order to make an accurate accusation that the person is here illegally?
How do you know the non English speaking worker doesn't have a green card? Or should we just report anyone who talks funny?
I'm sure law enforcement has better things to do then follow up on the large number of racist allegations of illegal status which would result. I'm not calling YOU a racist, but if you ask people to report illegal workers, a lot of what is reported will be fueled by nothing but racism, simply because people have no way of knowing the legal status of a person and can only determine that they talk funny.
My friend was employed at a golf course during the period in which he was a legal non citizen. If you had played golf there and heard his broken English, would you have reported him? I'm sorry, but that is just not right.
Certainly if you have actionable information which proves the worker to be illegal, report it.
Or have you reported every crime you've ever witnessed, no matter how trivial. Heck, I exceed the speed limit on a pretty regular basis and have yet to turn myself into the cops. I guess I'm just using my deputy powers to analyze the severity of my crime and it came up short.
I'm all for turning suspicious illegals in. Like guys who want to learn how to take off and fly a route but aren't so interested in the whole landing thing. Definitely worth a phone call. But some guy working at the taco stand? Nope.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
Nobody needs to put words in your mouth to demonstrate how truly idiotic your analysis is.
A non-English speaker tucking in an elderly person at a retirement home and receiving some sort of cash payment is not in any, way, shape, or form equivalent to terrorist activity.
The comparison trivializes the terrorist threat and I, for one, truly resent the substance and tone of your post for doing just that.
In addition, your views of what constitutes illegal activity by non-English speakers seems to be informed by something other than a firm understanding of criminal law.
We can beat the Democrats without this line of argument.
The nursing home and the employee would be committing tax evasion. If I knew a business wasn't paying its taxes I'd certainly report that. But that's not simply someone who is here illegally.
If I knew of someone who was just here illegally and otherwise obeying the law? No. I wouldn't report that.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
as do the alphabet broadcast networks and the lefty cables....
The Republicans have an election winning issue, if they are ready to withstand the scurrilous guttersniping of "racists, etc." that the media purveys at the drop of a hat from the mouthpieces of the left.
Uncritically.
As NPR & PBS do on a daily basis using your and my tax dime to propagate the left-wing ordure of the left side of the Democrats. Gwen Ifill, Judy Woodward, and Margaret Warner are all shills for any anti-Bush, anti-American trope that rises out of the muck........
Fred Thompson is my man on this issue, the rest of the Repubs [save Tancredo, who is lonely in his one-issue quest] just don't pass any of my BS-detector tests.
From McCain to Romney to whomever, they set it off buzzing....
I can asnswer it with a straight face...no, I wouldn't turn them in, not unless they were comitting some other crime.
Do you call the cops when you're driving along and you see someone speeding? Do you call the cops when you see a scantily clad woman walking the streets who you think might be a prostitute?
the "vigillante" comments from the Dems are silly but in reality we all don't go around reporting every possible crime we see committed.
you would report the scantily-clad woman, if she was walking the sidewalk in front of your house, day after day, or night after night. And going up and talking to every male who happened to stop and chat with her. So, never say never. Remember, NIMBY. Or front yard, in this case.
_Now, if you are a Republican, you can probably answer this with a straight face._
Rudy answered this question with a straight face at the last REPUBLICAN debate. Were you happy with his answser? How about Huckabee? And why _didnt_ Romney demand to see papers from the worker who was on his property, but was hired by a contractor?
Do you "demand to see papers" of every single person your contractor hires to work on your property prior to their starting work?
Or, put differently, I hire a contractor to do some landscaping at my condo complex (I'm a trustee) and I suspect some of the folks the landscaper has with him might not be, erm, proper. In conversations with him, the landscaper (whom I know on a first name basis) tells me, "Their papers looked better than any of mine." Am I then supposed to look this contractor in the face and say, "Swell, let me see them"?
Just asking. Seriously.
-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.
It's done all the time and under certain circumstances hailed and encouraged. whistleblower laws are passed, sex harassment complaints are encouraged, civil rights violations reported are a must, environmental regulations, common city ordinances, etc, etc. And before anybody jumps these are not always done to or against the devil of modern times, the big corporation.
I allow for the fact that we are dealing with millions of people but that is related to an immigration problem that has festered for years and in truth I'm not sure I'd do it myself. But as the righteous refer to this as vigilantism they should be at least aware the it is not only accepted, but encouraged.
"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville
a criminal and shouting various slogans bordering on sedition.
Oh, that's Sean Penn and a bunch of Anglo trust fund babies.
Never mind.
American scum, foreign scum, all kinds.
Other than that, you're right, never mind.
"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville
We should simply ignore?
shop lifting? auto theft? credit fraud? ID theft? child abuse? tax evasion? Just let us know.
I look to the democrats for leadership on developing this list.
Why are immigration crimes seperate and unequal?
Almost every illegal adult is guilty of document fraud and the necessary forgery to obtain the paperwork. Tax evasion is highly likely as are identity theft and fraud. Illegal re-entry a second time always has been a felony. Tucked away in the Senate's failed immigration bills were actual amnesty for most if not all of these crimes. Of course, when supporters cried there was "no amnesty" they deceptively referred only to status crimes. And, yes, those bills would have been amnesty for those.
My main beef with illegal immigration is not the security risk it represents, although that is huge. No, illegal immigration's worse effect is to cheapen respect for the rule of law. No amount of spinning can change the fact it accomplishes exactly that.
The Bush Administration turned a blind eye to these crimes, and the GOP lost its former mantle as the party of law and order. Mind you, citizens and lawful permanent residents continued to be prosecuted for these type crimes but a special dispensation was given to illegal aliens who violated the same laws. I noticed today that Kerry Rushton has claimed that the Administration has started to act more aggressively here. I think the boat will be uprighted once Bush leaves the White House and a frightened Congress and president begin to enforce the law to such an extent press releases aren't necessary whenever they do. Fortunately, the face of amnesty has become largely a Democratic one now. Given the rank and file of both parties want our immigration laws enforced, this is a positive development for the GOP.
"Now, if you are a Republican, you can probably answer this with a straight face. If you're a Democrat, you are likely finding yourself already tying yourself up in knots searching for the right way to twist this all around into some sort of complicated concoction of logic...that's the way YOUR Prez wannabes handled it anyway..."
Not sure if you caught this, but apparently, Mitt Romney STILL is employing the same firm to mow his lawn and remove the leaves as he employed a year ago, and apparently, two of their employees TODAY working at his mansion are undocumented workers.Same firm which worked on his property a year ago, and was found to have been using undocumented workers.
Guess that's how YOUR candidate handles it... they give 'em a job!
Nice. (Hate to muddle your arguments up with the facts)