|
Post by outlaw on Apr 5, 2007 20:02:50 GMT -4
www.hometownannapolis.com/cgi-bin/read/2007/04_05-34/GOVAbove is a link (if it works) to a "Capital" article about this. In my opinion, this is a horrible idea. Why do our legislators continue to reward illegal behavior? They say we put them through public school anyway. We shouldn't to that either! Two wrongs don't make a right. It's disgusting that they even have nerve to spend time and money considering this nonsense. Does anyone know where Pipkin stands on this? I can't find anything online about his position. It seems to be a waste of time to e-mail him because he doesn't respond.
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Apr 5, 2007 21:09:45 GMT -4
Stupid, absolutely STUPID.
Reward people with discounted tuition who are here ILLEGALLY.
They broke the law to get here They are breakiing the law by being here They are beaking the law to stay here
BUT let's make it cheaper for them to go to college. OK---NOT
AND to coup-decrap O'MALLEY LIKES THE IDEA.... DOPE.
|
|
|
Post by outlaw on Apr 5, 2007 21:27:53 GMT -4
I don't think I can ever support O'Malley after this, even though he is adorable.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Apr 6, 2007 8:07:44 GMT -4
I should hope you never supported a man for governor because, or partly because, he was adorable... I'm sure you're just kidding, though.
This must be the biggest slap in the face of the citizens since... since... who knows what? It's incredulous to think that this measure may actually pass. I'll be sending some pointed emails later today.
I thought the assinine apology was over-the-top, but this really is a whole new world.
|
|
|
Post by shadow1 on Apr 6, 2007 8:45:32 GMT -4
My daughter attended U of MD and didn't get any help from the state, why the h*ll should illegal immigrants. My daughter was born, raised, resides, and works in MD and it was a hastle to deal with the system through graduation. It was easier if you were from out-of-state (more money in the schools pocket) - now they're asking taxpayers to foot the bill for illegals, when those here legally can't even reap benefits from the system.
Legislation was sponsored by Del. Victor Ramirez, HHHMMMM!
|
|
|
Post by Frank on Apr 6, 2007 9:34:21 GMT -4
This is just what we need. More encouragement to come into this country. Why don't people see this as a problem? Is it just to get the Hispanic vote? It seems like we give two different messages. Our border patrols will keep our borders secure from all illegal entry, but if you do get in, here is food, shelter, and a free education. What a crock!
Press 1 for English
Press 2 to be diconnected until you can speak English!
|
|
|
Post by outlaw on Apr 6, 2007 11:41:56 GMT -4
I read on the news ticker that there will be "groups of students" rallying in support of this hooey in Annapolis today. Hopefully it will be on the news tonight.
Matt, my conscience doesn't allow me to support someone based on their beauty, but O'Malley is a cutie.
I'm finding in our college searching that the costs for Maryland schools are pretty high as compared to similar schools in other states.
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Apr 6, 2007 11:56:13 GMT -4
I read on the news ticker that there will be "groups of students" rallying in support of this hooey in Annapolis today. Hopefully it will be on the news tonight. Illegals? Green cards anyone? INS???
|
|
|
Post by Frank on Apr 6, 2007 12:29:59 GMT -4
Someone sent this to me. Don't know how true it is:
Subject: Immigration Laws
1. Only professionals or investors can immigrate to the country. No unskilled laborers will be allowed in. Investors must be able to invest at least 40,000 times the daily average wage. If they can't, they are not allowed in.
2. Immigrants may purchase property, but locations and availability will be limited. Ocean front property cannot be purchased by immigrants. It is exclusively for citizens born in the country.
3. Immigrants cannot vote nor can they be elected to any public office.
4. Immigrants cannot collect any type of government assistance.
5. Immigrants cannot protest the countries government, policies or president.
6. Immigrants cannot display a flag of a foreign country.
7. Immigrants who have illegally entered the country will be found and imprisoned.
Sound kind of harsh?
Well, these are laws that are currently part of the Immigration Laws of, you guessed it, MEXICO!!!
|
|
|
Post by Pete Richter on Apr 6, 2007 13:33:14 GMT -4
The illegals are here looking for weapons of mass destruction, and to do the jobs Americans won't do. Therefore our politicians, and law enforcement has put the illegals above the law. Two young girls, both citizens, were just killed by a drunk driving illegal with a history of drunk driving, and other arrests in Va.. He did no jail time, and was not deported. And by the way, no terrorists walked across the border with these assets to our community either....... Put your seat belts on sheeple.
|
|
|
Post by ljp on Apr 6, 2007 16:14:38 GMT -4
Really wake up...
Back in January 'Ahnold' got a bill passed in California that allows illegals free health insurance. How long has the issue of giving illegals a drivers licenses in MD been going on?? (Which cracks me up as I know for a fact that many many people use the same Resident Alien card and Social Security # in this area alone. How long has this in-state college thing been going on? Apparently no one is stepping up to offer the con side. I get that it is difficult to become a citizen in this country even harder since 9/11. But aren't their kids if born here considered citizens? Or did they pack their babies in back packs as they were sneaking under the fences?? Are the illegals' children really considered illegals? Used to be that if you were here illegally and discovered, then you had to prove a good reason to be here. Like: health reasons; personal security;etc. Now when discovered we just give people that are: earning an income from an American company and sending the money out of the country; NOT paying a penny towards Federal or State taxes, benefits that used to be reserved for the people who paid taxes?
We don't have any right to condemn immigrants, my God that is how most of us got here. But it would be nice if I didn't have to pay to support people who are draining our nations economy.
Outlaw if you want Pipkin to respond you have to mention the Bay Bridge in your mail. It seems to be the only thing he is passionate about.
|
|
|
Post by outlaw on Apr 6, 2007 17:43:30 GMT -4
I think all Pipkin's huffing and puffing about the bridge is an act. The reality is that like most politicians, he doesn't care about regular people.
From the news tonight it looks like this issue may just stall for now, but no doubt it will rear its ugly head again. The fact that this is even being considered shows how far gone we are from common sense. Congratulations to immigrants who become citizens legally. Those who do not should be deported.
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Apr 6, 2007 21:16:50 GMT -4
I got your sheeple Pete, RIGHT here.
|
|
|
Post by misternuke on Apr 6, 2007 22:52:19 GMT -4
What I find especially maddening about this proposal is how easily the state is swayed to give in-state tuition to illegal immigrants, when they steadfastly refuse to grant in-state tuition to the spouses and children of active-duty military members who are stationed in MD under permanent duty orders! Apparently the state is more inclined to side with scoff-laws than with the families of the very heroes who are defending their way of life. I think it says a lot about the kind of state we are living in and the twisted values system that seems to prevail around here.
|
|
|
Post by baycitydan on Apr 7, 2007 9:50:09 GMT -4
Supporting law breakers, way to go Maryland. Here's a bigger problem: As more and more illegals are given amnesty, they will then have more and more of an influential vote and political pull. The obvious thing that they want is free everything and no immigration laws at everyones expense. It will slowly happen if things like this get rubber stamped.
|
|
|
Post by falgar25 on Apr 7, 2007 10:45:19 GMT -4
I just don't get it. If you can identify someone as an illegal then why doesn't that immediately start the process of deportation? Can anyone think of another law that you can break and have the Govt. say, "yeah, we know that you are currently breaking the law but we're going to ignore that and help support you in your law breaking?"
Anyone born on US soil is a US citizen. I believe there was even a situation where a woman gave birth in US airspace and the child was determined to be a citizen. I'm not sure I like the law, I would prefer that the legality of the mother be considered before granting citizenship to the child. So it's possible that these children of illegal aliens are US citizens.
The illegals already have political pull. If they didn't then we wouldn't be having this discussion. The concern now is how much more pull they will get. It won't be too long before local laws are changed to allow illegals to be elected to local offices. The Constitution may never be changed to allow them in Federal Govt, but they will still have a lot of pull in local Govt.
I just don't get it.
|
|
|
Post by highlander73 on Apr 7, 2007 11:04:36 GMT -4
I think there are many, many levels of "illegal immigrant" that confuses the issue. There are those here illegally, here illegally but have applied for citizenship, those here illegally but are waiting deportation, those here illegally but waiting for legal hearings, etc, etc, etc, etc. This new legislation itself is restricted to only those that are "in the system." It even says they have to have paid taxes in the last year or something like that. I don't get that either.
|
|
|
Post by falgar25 on Apr 7, 2007 11:43:36 GMT -4
I'm sorry, but to me "here illegally" is all that needs to be said. The most I would give if I were king would be to consider pleas for asylum before sending them back. If the US would have granted someone asylum if the application had been correctly made, then grant asylum and let them stay. Otherwise, send them back to where they belong.
I suspect the provisions in the proposal about being "in the system" and having paid taxes last year are there to make the proposal more palatable and likely to cause fewer problems for anyone who votes for it. This is part of the political pull that I believe the illegals have; without this pull, this proposal would not even have been written.
One thing I wish those who are pushing for some kind of forgiveness or amnesty would consider is the message that would send. Remember, we've done this forgiveness/amnesty thing before. The idea was that if we cleared the books just this one time, we could then do things right and control immigration. OK, so now we're saying just one more time. So what does that say to those who would like to immigrate here and become citizens and have tried to follow the rules? If they see that, yet again, we are giving preference to those that have not followed the rules, then why should anyone NOT try to come across illegally?
|
|
|
Post by ljp on Apr 7, 2007 12:20:10 GMT -4
ok it's all making a little more sense to me. If a person, regardless how they arrived is in the 'system' they are at least trying to do it the right way then can we argue? It takes years and years for applications for citizenship to be approved. I know of one person who applied when he was 5 and didn't get approved until he was 22. I actually read the article after I posted last and read that the parents must have paid state taxes for one year before the students application. I am not sure then that I dissagree with the bill. Shouldn't the language then be changed to state that allowing students to take advantage of in-state tuition are children of aliens awaiting citizenship? Rather than categorizing them as 'illegals'? It seems to me there would be less anger involved.
|
|
|
Post by falgar25 on Apr 7, 2007 13:02:10 GMT -4
Let's say we have two families, each with a child.
Family one finds themselves in the country illegally. They snuck across the boarder or they overstayed a Visa. For the sake of this "argument" it doesn't matter. What matters is they are currently in the country illegally. Now they want to be "in the system" so they start paying taxes and apply for citizenship.
Family two would like be in the US also. However, they don't sneak across the border and they don't overstay a Visa. Family two follows the rules, applies for immigration status and plans to apply for citizenship even though they know it will take up to 15 years. It's likely that their child will be too old to take advantage of the US education system, but maybe their grandchildren will.
Each family would like their child to benefit from being in the US and being in the education system. Which family should be rewarded for their actions? Should family one be rewared for breaking the rules and "cutting the line?" Or should family two be rewarded for attempting to follow the rules?
To my mind, neither should be rewarded, but there is a wrong to be righted. Family two shouldn't be made to second guess their decision to follow the rules. Family one shouldn't benefit from breaking the rules. Allowing family one to stay in this country and continue to take advantage of our education system isn't being fair to all the family twos who have tried to do things right.
No one said life is fair, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't work to make it as fair as possible.
|
|
|
Post by Frank on Apr 9, 2007 18:14:35 GMT -4
How about giving the illegal a rifle and have him defend our country for four years. At that point, he and his imediate family could become American citizens. Four years vs. fifteen years is a big difference. No border patrol though, that could be a catastrophy!
|
|
|
Post by falgar25 on Apr 9, 2007 21:03:20 GMT -4
Hasn't something like this already been done? It sounds like a good idea. It would be wrong to require military service as the only way to achieve citizenship, but it would be a nice alternate path.
|
|
|
Post by ljp on Apr 9, 2007 21:28:24 GMT -4
and how many members of the Taliban would be happy to take us up on that offer?
|
|
|
Post by kl on Apr 11, 2007 13:43:34 GMT -4
Ha ha ha..He said Taliban.. Al-Queda's next I assume? But either way you look at it, they broke the law. Should be sent packing, and come in legally.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 11, 2007 22:24:04 GMT -4
You'd be surprised how much the state does for illegals.... 95% of them are here illegals... every day they drive drunk, get in accidents and get arrested. These crimes are deportable offenses... they never get deported. When their court day does show up, they never appear... and we want to support these people? People who endanger the lives of the hard working people on a daily basis.
|
|