Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

There might not be any immigration meetings in the White House on Monday but there will certainly be debate on how to fund the immigration enforcement effort for the White House in the House of Reps. @ 5:00 p.m..

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

sounds good to me. they need to stop raiding working families and put more money in border security along mexico border. gotta stop more headaches sneaking in before we address the illegal population.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

There already is enough border security, senator specter said it himself.

40% of illegal immigrants entered legally.

India has the fastest growing population of immigrants staying in the United States illegally.

India is nowhere near the Mexico border.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

can you link me please to his quote? unfortunately, majority of politicians dont share your thought at the moment

in other words, 60% enters the country illegally, through the border.

looking at pure numbers, out of 12 million, 57% of illegal immigrants originate from mexico, which is around 7 million. out of 12 million, only 300,000 are from india. yes, india has the fastest growing population of illegal immigrants, but the number of illegal mexicans coming through the border is still exponentially higher than the number of indians overstaying their visas. so, the biggest source of illegal immigration is still mexico.

yes, and thats why indians at least came into this country with inspection. same cant be said for most illegal mexicans sneaking in through the border. so i dont know where you are going with this argument. the biggest problem is still people coming in through the border, not people overstaying their visas.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

Erase / Rewind

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

dude bruinman, can you just stfu??

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

seriously dude. this site here is for people to express their opinions even if they are wrong. correcting some one isnt going to magically pass anything or make you look good. to me it makes you look like a d-bag. everytime you post you always post negative stuff or gotta say something. just let it be.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

no.

lol i made another kid angry for no reason.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

It was actually Schumer not Specter who stated "the borders are NOW safe enough" but here goes a link just for you:
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/05...y5028447.shtml


in other words, you are asking for border security to only cover 60% of the problem because it suits you best.


following your way of thinking:
we should stop investigating violent crimes - because cops can catch more people driving over the speed limit.

If you are in the country illegally from overstaying your visa or crossing the border with out inspection, you are still charged with the same crime....

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

oh i sure am very angry with u my friend. lolz

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

Securing the borders sounds like a good idea....But, none of the terrorists from 9/11 crossed the Mexican border, all of them have a VALID visa.....Are we trying to protect from terrorists of from dishwasher and day laborers?

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

thanks. i wish the rest of politicians share his thought. i really do. and the american people.



only? last time i checked, 60% is a pretty huge, significant number. so you dont want border security because it only covers 60%? isnt that laughable? no really, at this point i have to suspect your level of analytical thinking.


so now you are equating violent crimes to visa overstays and speed violations to crossing the border illegally because i said 7 million poses more problem than 300,000? lol. this is funny because below you specifically mention that both visa overstays and illegal crossing result in same crimes. you just contradicted yourself in the same post. LOL. you have no clue about what you are arguing and you just throw out your thoughts without thinking. so based on your logic, you want to spend more money chasing down couple hundred thousand overstays who are already here? sounds alot like raiding workplace families. we need to stop further illegal immigrants coming in through the border. as far as overstaying visas go, theres no systematic way to prevent that, is there? once the government gives you a visa after interviews and background check, its up to you to make sure you leave the country before the deadline. and as a matter of fact, ICE has better time tracking down visa overstays because they are in the system.

all that aside, i dont understand why you constantly change the main point of your argument. you are honestly saying that more money should be spent to stop 300,000 indians coming in then to stop 7 million mexicans coming in? and the only reason you can give is "well, both are charged the same crime". LOL.

but we're not talking about the criminal act itself. what are you trying to argue? point still stands significantly more people are entering this country illegally through the border without inspection and the border needs to be addressed before CIR.

you're trying to argue that the border is safe and shouldnt focus on border security because the rate of illegal indians coming in is higher than illegal mexicans. i mean think about that. you still want to make that argument? rofl.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

if you are asking which one is more important, of course we need to focus more on stopping terrorists. however, illegal immigration through the border is in and of itself a huge problem as well. fact is, the border is porous and the sovereignty of this nation is being invaded daily by these illegal aliens. public perception counts alot in washington politics and right now americans are worried about the border next to mexico, not people choosing to overstay their visas to their detriment.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

thats nothing new i think india is the most populated country int he world after china. why wouldnt you expect them to do the same thing here in u.s

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

.... so you were wrong.



You've got no arguement, you resort to putting words in my mouth then making a point against it.
What I did say/ask was, why are YOU only asking for 60% of the problem to be dealt with? Which you still have not answered.

You pretty much proved yourself wrong here... if you go back and re-read what I wrote it said "following YOUR way of thinking:" which you just proved was wrong. - 1 for you.

The point came after you posted that "atleast they entered through inspection" which does not make a difference when it comes to the crime.

My point is that "we need more border security" is not a reason to delay CIR because as people who actually know what they are talking about have said "we already have enough border secruity to move forward with CIR".
The Mexican border is not the only place illegal immigrants enter this country but you feel that it is the only place that needs added security I used India as an example of another problem DHS has to work on. I never said the Mexican border was not a problem; I said it was not the ONLY problem.

rofl lol ahaha omg haha

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

wrong about what? point still stands border is still not secure enough for most people. you gonna take one quote from schumer (not to mention the fact that its his opinion), and present that as gospel? sure, go head, im sure that gives you peace of mind. thats up to you.





oh you asked a question? sorry, your sentence didnt read even like one. i guess we're having a language issue here as well. if you want to ask someone a question, you need to form a questionaire. not say something and then turn around and say you were asking a question and didnt get an answer. rofl.

i never said we should only deal with 60% of the problem. what i said was we need to deal with it and focus on it because it is the highest source of illegal immigration. its common sense. yes we need to address visa overstays as well. that doesnt take away from the fact that border security needs to be improved immensely. understood?



you seem to have short term memory. i specifically said mexico has higher number of illegal immigrants coming in (7 million) compared to india (300,000) and thus more focus should be on border security. and then you followed that up with preposterous comparison of violent crimes to overstaying visa and traffic violations to crossing the border illegally which has no relevance to the fact that mexico has higher number of illegal immigrants. my way of thinking is based on pure numbers: focus on border security more because more illegal immigrants are coming in through the border. you shifted from that and started talkin about the severity of either types of actions for god knows why. so you completely strayed off from the topic and started another brand new argument. got it? no comprendo?

again you are straying off topic. we're not talking about the criminal act itself. what are you trying to argue? point still stands significantly more people are entering this country illegally through the border without inspection and the border needs to be addressed before CIR.




sorry, you need more then one person to qualify to use the word "people". you take one quote from one politician and take that as gospel. ok, i cant help with that.

when did i say mexican border is the only problem? all i said was it was the biggest route through which illegal immigration is occurring, and thus needs more attention. seriously, you choose to debate me and yet with every post you seem to have hard time grasping main arguments and even your own sentences. its alright though.

oh im sorry my "rofl" hurt your feelings. i just find your confusion amusing.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

Btw Brucie, Mexico is not a third world country FYI. And yes you did say it was one.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

oh ok, thanks for the clarification. i guess "developing country" is the more politically correct term

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

Yes, a country that belongs to the G-20 or the OECD is clearly a third world country.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

Yes, mexico is was a third world country, but not for the reason he believes... so he is still wrong.

The 1st, 2nd, and 3rd world country model is outdated.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

Tell that to the IMF, or the World Bank or the United Nations who categorize countries based on GDP and other socioeconomic factors every year.

I don't think Mexico is considered an industrialized nation yet, but it's probably considered a NIC - certainly not a developing nation.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

Yep, its considered a NIC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newly_i...alized_country

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

Arguing on the Internet is like the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded!

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

give up and now we're gonna debate on the semantics of economic categorization of mexico? rofl.

but yes, the term third world country is outdated and shouldnt be used

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

it certainly is a developing nation as opposed to developed nation such as the US, albeit some controversy over the usage of the term.

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

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

yeah, mexico is now shoulder to shoulder with malaysia, indonesia, and south africa. bravo, mexico has come a long way.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

You answered your own question there.
For it to be "most people" it would need to be a majority of the population which it is not. Maybe "most people" on Fox News but not "most people" in America.

So you are wrong.


border security may need to be improved immensely, but not before CIR can be considered (or how you put it "before we address the illegal population").

So you are wrong.


The analogy of violent crime versus speeding tickets was to demonstrate how "focusing on the biggest number" is not always the most effective strategy.

...

"No Comprendo?" oh man your racist comment really hurt me there "rofl"



He said that in an interview after a Border Security hearing where people who actually know what they are talking about when it comes to the border discussed the state of border security... people like hmm... Customs and Border Protection officials. Even it was only Schumer his opinion compared to whose? yours? that's a no brainer (no pun intended).


You said the mexican border is the only problem we should deal with here...
http://dreamact.info/forum/showpost....03&postcount=2

Please, do not flatter yourself.


On second thought, I'll allow you the opportunity to indulge, at this point I could only pity what unimaginable measures you would surmount to in a sift of the slightest trickle of hope.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

As a person living as an undocumented immigrant in the United States you have little room to talk.

I hate to break it to you, top-shot, but you have little if anything to do with the success America has achieved.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

why dont you two guys go get some coffee and meet in real life so you can have a long discussion.

this forum isnt for that kind of stuff. i dont see how its helping DREAM get passed. just give it up. no one wins, and if you do, who cares its just the internet. some people have a hard time understanding that the internet is not real life.

move on.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

obviously you have hard time interpreting sentences. ok, nm. as for your assumption that most americans believe that the border is secure enough, im sorry to break it to you, but thats purely your opinion derived from schumer's quote.

10 months ago, only 14% of americans thought that the government is doing enough to secure the border.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...alizing_aliens

granted, obama has spent more money and man power near the border since, but i have to wonder how much of that percentage has gone up. sorry, i have a baseline figure from less than a year ago to back up my claim, and you dont. nice try though.


rofl, your level of knowledge in this matter continues to disappoint me. actually, everyone with a slightest clue know that border security comes first before CIR, both democrats and republicans. they wont address CIR unless they address border security first. even president obama puts border security first before any immigration reform. this is all basic stuff.





just to let you know, analogy works by comparing 2 similar school of thoughts, not comparing apples to oranges like you have done lol. im comparing pure numbers while you are comparing the severity of either two with that analogy. i know its hard for you but think about it.

i think most people would agree with me that since majority of illegal population is from mexico and the most illegal immigration is occuring through the souther border, we should focus on that. it doesnt solve all the problem, but it sure solves good portion of it. but hey! since you are so adamant about this, so whats your take on "the most effective strategy"? care to explain? you'll probably say " i dont wanna waste time with you" and cop out. rofl.

fact of the matter is, congress and the president already see border enforcement as priority over CIR. dont believe me? google it. its so easy a caveman can do it. rofl.


your constant failed attempt to correct me and ridicule me is really becoming pathetic. racist? im a racist because i used spanish? i learned 4 years of spanish in high school and college. rofl. que burro!





Schumer said that the number of people captured along the border with mexico between Oct. 1 and May 15 was down 27% from the same period the previous year. if 100 people crossed before and only 73 are now crossing, thats called improvement, not secure. this is sort of the argument that people will talk about. you have to start seeing things from both side of the aisle instead of sticking your head in the sand and filter out what you dont want to hear. its called, ironically, using your brain as you have so eloquently put by processing information in your own head and coming to your own conclusion instead of relying on others to spoonfeed you what the results mean. rofl.




now i know you have reading comprehension problems as well. where in that post does it imply that i said mexican border is the only problem we should deal with? if i say "i love my mother" you interpret that as i only love my mother but not my father? again, stay in school.



i dont have to flatter myself having this debate with you its pretty funny how you twist and squirm with every attempt to say something remotely worthwhile to be a comeback.


ROFL....what?
in a sift of the slightest trickle of hope? huh? what? are you actually trying to sound articulate? dude, if you are gonna say something, at least try to make sense. use the dictionary. ask your friend. something. que raro!

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

what does me living in the US without papers have to do with the fact that mexico is now shoulder to shoulder with malaysia, indonesia, and south africa? lol, yet another random attempt to create something out of nothing in order to attack me.

i admire your perseverance though, however pathetic it might be. rofl

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

Actually it has come a long way, just like Malaysia, Indonesia, and South Africa. In fact, Mexico now has the 11th largest economy in the world. And no, in case you were wondering, people in South Africa don't run around naked, nor do they live in huts. They have modern cities like Cape Town, where they party with Tiesto in their Frida Giannini latest fashions.

And also, you forgot to mention the other countries on that list - China, India, and Brazil. I'm sure it was just a coincidence that you left out the fastest booming economies in the world - which are now "shoulder to shoulder" with Mexico.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

now you are just making stuff up as you go along. pathetic, really.

'

you are correct in your assumption that i intentionally left out china and india. i left them out because their GDP is representative of their sheer massive population, but based on per capita, they are actually lower compared to mexico. mexico's GDP per capita is more comparable to malaysia and south africa.

good job at trying to stir up a pathetic attempt to label me as racist. rofl

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

So that^ wasn't sarcasm?

*shrugs

PS: You seem like a really jolly fella, always laughing at the end of every sentence. Yet your posts are so negative - quite the dichotomy.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

no it wasnt. do you have something against malaysia, indonesia, and south africa? if not, why do you assume that i was? but i guess i can see how you took it that way considering how you are hell bent on labeling me as racist

well the thing is, i dont see my opinions as "negative". i consider them "realistic". you are the one who thinks they are "negative". so yeah, i choose to consider every issue from many different angles and not have tunnel vision mentality and be happy with it

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

That's bullshit, and you know it.

Oh, and go back and re-read my post. It says "in case you were wondering". So if you weren't wondering, it didn't apply to you. Stop projecting.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

no i really dont. and its amusing to see how you get so worked up about it, too.

yeah, i wasnt "wondering"...you're the one who started projecting. i was pointing at the fact that YOU were assuming that i was, and you were. if you didnt assume that, you wouldnt have tried to tell me that south africa has modern cities and peopel dont run around naked when all i did was compare mexico to south africa based on economic strength. who's projecting? rofl

stop trying to back paddle you are making yourself look ridiculous. haha...you are trying to argue your own previous post. hilarious.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

Ok, that was fun Bruinman. I just wanted to get to 500 posts - it looks cute.

rofl, hehe, lmao, hell bent, lol, rofl, haha.

Toodles.

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

rofl case closed

Re: Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup
 

All that poll proves is that people believe more can be done at the border, "not doing enough" and "not secure enough" are different stories..




"The border is secure enough to move forward with CIR" what part don't you get? Even if border security needed to be addressed it is no longer a necessity for CIR to move forward.

So you lose.




I compared the negative effect of focusing only on "pure numbers" and not risk factors in both cases.

So you lose.


what you "think" doesn't cut it and again thats where you lose.

Again, I never said border enforcement was not a priority, only that according to the people who know what they are talking about, the border is secure enough now to move forward with Comprehensive Immigration Reform.



sugarcoat it however you'd like, it was intended to be a racist remark.




So thats the only statistic you think they looked at during the entire border security hearing? (<-rhetorical question just to be clear) Like I have already explained, Schumers statement was made after being briefed by those most informed on border security. All you did was quote one statistic from the article and then change the sentence after it to make it seem like an original idea.




"put more money in border security along mexico border. gotta stop more headaches sneaking in before we address the illegal population."

by only mentioning that there needs to be a boost in border security along the mexican border before moving CIR forward, you implied that it was the only problem left, or that needs, to be dealt with.



It makes perfect sense, you not understanding it does not change the fact.



Seemingly every point you attempt to make is littered with despairing personal attacks, running out of air?