Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
meadandale
Participant[quote=briansd1]Kicking her “family member” out after 9 years is not a compassionate way to treat a person who’s served her well.[/quote]
Yet you are all for cracking down on employers and increasing workplace raids (based on your repeated assertions that Obama is doing more about the immigration problem than GW). What do you think happens to these employees being employed illegally when their employer is ‘caught’?
Participant[quote=briansd1]Kicking her “family member” out after 9 years is not a compassionate way to treat a person who’s served her well.[/quote]
Yet you are all for cracking down on employers and increasing workplace raids (based on your repeated assertions that Obama is doing more about the immigration problem than GW). What do you think happens to these employees being employed illegally when their employer is ‘caught’?
Participant[quote=briansd1]Kicking her “family member” out after 9 years is not a compassionate way to treat a person who’s served her well.[/quote]
Yet you are all for cracking down on employers and increasing workplace raids (based on your repeated assertions that Obama is doing more about the immigration problem than GW). What do you think happens to these employees being employed illegally when their employer is ‘caught’?
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=FormerSanDiegan]
If you think about it, it’s the only thing she could have done. Imagine the damage to her campaign (particularly in the primary) if she would have hired immigration attorneys to assist her illegal immigrant employee. Soft on immigration does not play to her base.
It’s a catch-22.
What are we supposed to do as citizens if/when we find out that our employees are here illegally ?
The reality is that in practice immigration policy in this state is equivalent to the don’t ask, don’t tell policy.
We are too weak to change the law to allow legalization and we are too weak to enforce the current law and deport everybody.[/quote]
I agree with you FormerSanDiegan.
But everything is relative in life.
Let’s look at the policy for a minute.
Which side is doing more to enforce our existing laws?
Which side is doing more to provide a path to legalization for immigrants here for decades already?[/quote]
We have a path for citizenship…and sneaking through the back door isn’t part of it.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=FormerSanDiegan]
If you think about it, it’s the only thing she could have done. Imagine the damage to her campaign (particularly in the primary) if she would have hired immigration attorneys to assist her illegal immigrant employee. Soft on immigration does not play to her base.
It’s a catch-22.
What are we supposed to do as citizens if/when we find out that our employees are here illegally ?
The reality is that in practice immigration policy in this state is equivalent to the don’t ask, don’t tell policy.
We are too weak to change the law to allow legalization and we are too weak to enforce the current law and deport everybody.[/quote]
I agree with you FormerSanDiegan.
But everything is relative in life.
Let’s look at the policy for a minute.
Which side is doing more to enforce our existing laws?
Which side is doing more to provide a path to legalization for immigrants here for decades already?[/quote]
We have a path for citizenship…and sneaking through the back door isn’t part of it.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=FormerSanDiegan]
If you think about it, it’s the only thing she could have done. Imagine the damage to her campaign (particularly in the primary) if she would have hired immigration attorneys to assist her illegal immigrant employee. Soft on immigration does not play to her base.
It’s a catch-22.
What are we supposed to do as citizens if/when we find out that our employees are here illegally ?
The reality is that in practice immigration policy in this state is equivalent to the don’t ask, don’t tell policy.
We are too weak to change the law to allow legalization and we are too weak to enforce the current law and deport everybody.[/quote]
I agree with you FormerSanDiegan.
But everything is relative in life.
Let’s look at the policy for a minute.
Which side is doing more to enforce our existing laws?
Which side is doing more to provide a path to legalization for immigrants here for decades already?[/quote]
We have a path for citizenship…and sneaking through the back door isn’t part of it.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=FormerSanDiegan]
If you think about it, it’s the only thing she could have done. Imagine the damage to her campaign (particularly in the primary) if she would have hired immigration attorneys to assist her illegal immigrant employee. Soft on immigration does not play to her base.
It’s a catch-22.
What are we supposed to do as citizens if/when we find out that our employees are here illegally ?
The reality is that in practice immigration policy in this state is equivalent to the don’t ask, don’t tell policy.
We are too weak to change the law to allow legalization and we are too weak to enforce the current law and deport everybody.[/quote]
I agree with you FormerSanDiegan.
But everything is relative in life.
Let’s look at the policy for a minute.
Which side is doing more to enforce our existing laws?
Which side is doing more to provide a path to legalization for immigrants here for decades already?[/quote]
We have a path for citizenship…and sneaking through the back door isn’t part of it.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=FormerSanDiegan]
If you think about it, it’s the only thing she could have done. Imagine the damage to her campaign (particularly in the primary) if she would have hired immigration attorneys to assist her illegal immigrant employee. Soft on immigration does not play to her base.
It’s a catch-22.
What are we supposed to do as citizens if/when we find out that our employees are here illegally ?
The reality is that in practice immigration policy in this state is equivalent to the don’t ask, don’t tell policy.
We are too weak to change the law to allow legalization and we are too weak to enforce the current law and deport everybody.[/quote]
I agree with you FormerSanDiegan.
But everything is relative in life.
Let’s look at the policy for a minute.
Which side is doing more to enforce our existing laws?
Which side is doing more to provide a path to legalization for immigrants here for decades already?[/quote]
We have a path for citizenship…and sneaking through the back door isn’t part of it.
ParticipantIs that you Lynn?
ParticipantIs that you Lynn?
ParticipantIs that you Lynn?
ParticipantIs that you Lynn?
ParticipantIs that you Lynn?
September 28, 2010 at 8:15 PM in reply to: Government spending is more beneficial than private spending #610974Participanteavesdropper…my post was simply meant as a tongue in cheek response to the original post on this thread: that government is the solution to all of our problems–that money confiscated by the government from the private sector is ALWAYS spent more wisely and more productively by the government than those that it was confiscated from.
CLEARLY this isn’t the case…
However, even as a conservative, I see the danger in unfettered free markets where externalities are ignored.
I do find it ironic, however, that the very people that advocate larger and larger governments seem to dance around events like the gulf oil spill (we had regulations and bureaucrats to enforce them that were corrupt or incompetent) or the continual problems with the food supply (ecoli in spinach and salmonella in eggs, recently) even though IT is also heavily regulated and we supposedly have an army of bureaucrats and inspectors policing the industry. These are examples of this awesome government that some want more of at work. Of course, some will argue “we just need more regulations and more inspectors”; these are the same people that, in spite of every increasing budgets and flat or declining test scores argue that the solution to declining education efficacy is more money…and of course, more laws and government involvement.
-
AuthorPosts
