Seeds for Immigration Policy Debate Could Be Planted in Spending Markup - Page 2

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?

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.

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.

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

.... 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

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.

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

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

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

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.