Jackson Free Press

In a positive development for our nation's ongoing effort to stop illegal immigration, the president recently signed into law legislation that provides needed funding for border security programs. The funds were contained in the 2009 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) appropriations bill, which was included in a larger bill passed by Congress in September. The legislation contained funding that will greatly assist DHS in cracking down on illegal immigration and keeping our nation more secure. With over 12 million people currently living in our country illegally, there is no question that our borders are broken. Illegal immigration is a serious problem that needs a serious solution. I have been glad to work with other like-minded members of Congress to increase funding for border enforcement and other programs that crack down on illegal immigration. We have made progress, but there is more work to be done.

SECURING OUR BORDER
I have visited the border at the Rio Grande River and witnessed firsthand the challenges facing our border patrol agents. To help them do their job better, I supported the Secure Fence Act of 2006, legislation that authorized the construction of nearly 700 miles of reinforced fence along our southern border. The bill also authorized more vehicle barriers along the border, as well as the use of more satellites and unmanned aerial vehicles to monitor our borders and stop those attempting to cross illegally. The DHS funding bill recently signed by the president included $775 million to complete the construction of the fencing along our southern border, as well as funding for 2,200 new border patrol agents.

E-VERIFY PROGRAM
Increasing security efforts along our southern border is not the sole solution to our illegal immigration problem. We must also do a better job of enforcing the laws against hiring illegals. If illegal immigrants cannot find work, they will be much less inclined to break our laws by entering the country. To help achieve this goal, I strongly support E-Verify, an online tool that allows employers to check the legal status of workers. While not perfect, E-Verify provides businesses and farmers in Mississippi and across the country with the best technology available to verify a prospective employee's status. I also believe that employers who use E-Verify should be provided protection from any mistakes or shortcomings in the program. I was glad to support the recent reauthorization of this vital program, which had been set to expire at the end of this month.

A NATION OF LAWS
In the Senate, I helped form the Border Security and Enforcement First Caucus. The caucus goals are full enforcement of existing immigration laws, stronger border security and interior enforcement legislation, and ensuring that amnesty is never given to illegal immigrants.
Our nation was built upon the rule of law. Mississippians understand that, and they expect Congress to enforce those laws to the fullest. I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to advance policies that will help us put an end to illegal immigration in our country.

Previous Comments

ID

140471

Comment

STOP THE INVASION!!! BUILD THE FENCE!!! MANDATE E-VERIFY!!! Southwest Border Patrol Sector Apprehensions (Source DHS/CBP) Fiscal Year-------------2005---------2006---------2007-------2008 (ends 9/30) San Diego------------126,879-----142,104---- 152,460--- 162,390 El Centro--------------55,725-------61,465----- 55,883----- 40,961 Yuma-----------------138,492-----118,549----- 37,992------ 8,363* Tucson --------------439,053-----392,074---- 378,239--- 317,696 El Paso---------------122,624-----122,256----- 75,464----- 30,312 Marfa ------------------10,532--------7,520------- 5,536------ 5,391 Del Rio -----------------68,547------42,636----- 22,920----- 20,761 Laredo -----------------75,268------74,840----- 56,714------43,658 Rio Grande Valley --134,136----110,528------ 73,430----- 75,473 Apprehensions----1,171,386--1,071,972-----858,638----705,005 *The Yuma Sector presently has a total of 94 miles of fencing. The difference is apparent.

Author

Buzzm1

Date

2008-11-08T18:37:53-06:00

ID

140472

Comment

STOP THE INVASION!!! UNITED STATES BORDER APPREHENSIONS (Source DHS/CBP) 1987--1,190,488------1995--1,394,554------2003----931,557 1988--1,008,145------1996--1,649,986------2004--1,160,395 1989----954,243------1997--1,412,953------2005--1,189,075 1990--1,169,939------1998--1,555,776------2006--1,089,902 1991--1,197,875------1999--1,579,010------2007----876,704 1992--1,258,482------2000--1,676,438------2008----723,825 1993--1,327,259------2001--1,266,213------2009----(beginning 10/01) 1994--1,094,717------2002----955,310 http://tinyurl.com/6l5y9p FACT: In the last 22 years, over 26 million illegals, have been apprehended, after crossing the border, into our United States. THE PROBLEM IS: Less than 1, out of 4 illegals, are estimated to have been apprehended. Mind boggling, isn't it. According to the U.S. Immigration Service another 6 million illegals in this country are visa overstays. That is, they got a visa legally in their home country, they came here to visit and then they never left. In the last 22 years, there have been another 4 million anchor babies born to illegals. Anchor babies are now being born at a rate of 350-400 thousand per year in our United States. All at our expense!! Then the ANCHOR BABIES qualify for welfare, food stamps, section-8 housing, all at our expense. American Taxpayers are getting screwed, over, and over, and over, again!!! Each illegal immigrant, on average, costs taxpayers $9,000 PER YEAR, over, and above, anything they might contribute in taxes!!!

Author

Buzzm1

Date

2008-11-08T18:40:00-06:00

ID

140473

Comment

ENFORCE OUR LAWS AGAINST ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION!!! THERE WILL BE NO AMNESTY!!! OUR ACCEPTABLE IMMIGRATION REFORM #1. Make Illegal Entry a Felony Permanently Barring Citizenship #2. Secure Our Borders with our National Guard!!! #3. Mandate E-Verify for ALL Employees!!! #4. Cut Off ALL Public Assistance to Illegals and Their Children!!! #5. Stop the Underground Economy!!! #6. End Birthright Citizenship for Illegals!!! ......and make it retroactive!!! #7. End Chain Migration!!! #8. Make English our Official Language!!! #9. Cut Off Federal Funds to Sanctuary Cities!! NOTHING MORE!!! NOTHING LESS!!!

Author

Buzzm1

Date

2008-11-08T18:41:32-06:00

ID

140475

Comment

Would someone school this jackass, with his "anchor babies" and "illegals," his ALL CAPS and his exclamation points!!! It is indeed "mind boggling" that anyone would be so ill-informed. Perhaps we could counter-balance the "invasion" by deporting people such as yourself. Personally, I vote that we load you into a cannon and fire it at Mexico. That will show them we mean BUSINESS!!!

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2008-11-09T00:13:24-06:00

ID

140476

Comment

What's wrong Brian C. Johnson, can't handle the truth??? If you can't stand the heat, don't go near the kitchen. Illegals, and their anchor babies, are costing American taxpayers, over 300 billion dollars a year. I can't speak for anyone else, but I have had my fill of it. All illegals must leave!!!

Author

Buzzm1

Date

2008-11-09T00:22:06-06:00

ID

140477

Comment

There are well over 10 million unemployed American workers, and that number is increasing with every passing day!!! In the last 22 years, illegals, using forged, falsified, or stolen identities, have illegally obtained up to 8.7 million jobs; jobs that rightfully belong to Americans. Tell your legislator to mandate E-Verify for all employees, for all employers, and for any benefit. Americans need those jobs!!! Report employers who employ illegals!!! Report employers of illegals http://reportillegals.com/ U.S. House of Representatives http://www.house.gov/ U.S. Senate http://www.senate.gov/ Contact your Senators and Representatives - office staff email addresses: http://tinyurl.com/2r7q6e Links to State Legislatures http://www.fvap.gov/links/legislativelinks.html Dear Legislators, Mandate, AND STRICTLY ENFORCE, E-Verify for ALL employers, for ALL employees, and for ANY benefit, and the I.C.E. raids, as well as all of the expemsive new detention facilities, would not be needed. The illegals would have to begin leaving of their own accord. Think of the economic effect of giving the 8.7 million jobs, that the illegals have illegally obtained, using forged, or stolen documents, back to Americans. Think of the economic effect of 65 billion more dollars being spent in our United States, rather than being remitted to Mexico, and South America. Think of the money saved by decreasing I.C.E.'s effort. Think of it, and then let's do it!!! BOYCOTT ANY BUSINESS THAT HIRES ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS!!! AND LET THEM KNOW ABOUT IT!!! DURING HARD TIMES, WE CAN HAVE AN IMPACT!!!

Author

Buzzm1

Date

2008-11-09T00:24:42-06:00

ID

140478

Comment

It seems you're new to the site Buzz, so you may not know that we have discussed these issues at considerable length. You might look at this thread for some sense of earlier conversations. You should know that this site is rather strict about its user rules. For one thing, use of the term "anchor baby" is not allowed. You are talking about American citizens when you use that term, so show some respect. The fact that you do not think those citizens deserve to be citizens does not give you the right to dehumanize them with a pejorative term. For another, when you throw around completely ridiculous figures like your claim that undocumented immigrants cost the United States $300 billion a year, you will have to provide a citation. Be careful not to cite disreputable sources, as many posters to this site have humiliated themselves by posting fraudulent sources. Finally, don't type in all caps. It's called shouting, and it's rude. I'm not going to debate the issue with you because life is, thankfully, too short for that. But do take some time to read the site rules, and look over some of our earlier discussions on this subject. Otherwise, you're wasting everyone's time, and you'll likely be disciplined by the administrator.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2008-11-09T02:32:14-06:00

ID

140479

Comment

Face up to it Brian C. Johnson, what really bothers you, is having the actual facts on the number of illegals that have invaded our United States, posted, for all Americans to see, and digest. All states, some much more than others, are suffering financially. from the presence of illegals. UNITED STATES BORDER APPREHENSIONS (Source DHS/CBP) YEAR----SOUTHWEST----NORTHERN-----COASTAL--------TOTAL 1999-------1,537,000---------11,669--------30,341--------1,579,010 2000-------1,643,679---------12,106--------20,651--------1,676,436 2001-------1,235,717---------12,338--------18,158--------1,266,213 2002----------929,809--------10,487--------15,014-----------955,310 2003----------905,065--------10,157--------16,335-----------931,557 2004--------1,139,282---------9,959--------11,154---------1,160,395 2005--------1,171,386---------7,343--------10,336---------1.189.075 2006--------1,071,972---------6,599--------10,521---------1,089,092 2007----------858,638---------6,380---------11,686-----------876,704 2008----------705,005---------7,925---------10,895-----------723,825 The problem is, the Border Patrol, intercepts less than 1, out of 4, illegals. The number of illegals in our United States, is not 12 million, it's more like 40-50 million. According to the U.S. Immigration Service another 6 million illegals in this country are visa overstays. That is, they got a visa legally in their home country, they came here to visit and then they never left.

Author

Buzzm1

Date

2008-11-09T08:58:56-06:00

ID

140480

Comment

Mississippi Law Against Illegal Immigration "First, any employer violating the provisions of the SB 2988 will be subject to the cancellation of any state or public contract, resulting in ineligibility for any such contract for up to three years. "Second, violations could also result in the loss of any license, permit, certificate or other document granted to the employer by any agency, department or government entity in the State of Mississippi for the right to do business in Mississippi for up to one year. "Third, a violating employer will be liable for any costs incurred by the agencies and institutions of the State of Mississippi, or any of its political subdivisions, because of the cancellation of the contract or the loss of any license or permit to do business in the state. Enforcement mechanisms of E-Verify include: • Employers violations can result in the cancellation of state or public contracts, resulting in eligibility for another contract for up to three years. • There can also be the loss of licenses or permits granted by any government entity in Mississippi for the right to do business in the state for one year. • The employer will be liable for any costs "incurred by the agencies and institutions of the State of Mississippi, or any of its political subdivisions, because of the cancellation of the contract or the loss of any license or permit to do business in the state. • "It will be a felony for any person to accept or perform employment for compensation if the person is an unauthorized or illegal alien. Upon conviction, a violator will be subject to imprisonment in the custody of the Department of Corrections for not less than one year and pay a fine of not less than $1,000, or both."

Author

Buzzm1

Date

2008-11-09T09:16:15-06:00

ID

140481

Comment

What's wrong Brian C. Johnson, can't handle the truth??? If you can't stand the heat, don't go near the kitchen. Buzzm1, whoever you are, we don't communicate that way. Take the sophomoric stuff elsewhere, and make your arguments respectfully if you want to continue posting here.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-11-09T10:50:42-06:00

ID

140482

Comment

ladd, Brian C. Johnson, wrote: "Would someone school this jackass" I would suggest the site administrators, first boot Brian C. Johnson, for his use of profanity. Seems to me that Brian C. Johnson is most likely a member of La Raza, MECHa, LULAC, or some other racist group, and can't stand to have the facts about illegals posted on this site. Would it be OK if I called BRian C. Johnson a jackass? NO?? How about if I called a jackass, Brian C. Johnson. OK Brian C. Johnson, carry on. STOP THE INVASION!!! UNITED STATES BORDER APPREHENSIONS (Source DHS/CBP) 1987--1,190,488------1995--1,394,554------2003----931,557 1988--1,008,145------1996--1,649,986------2004--1,160,395 1989----954,243------1997--1,412,953------2005--1,189,075 1990--1,169,939------1998--1,555,776------2006--1,089,902 1991--1,197,875------1999--1,579,010------2007----876,704 1992--1,258,482------2000--1,676,438------2008----723,825 1993--1,327,259------2001--1,266,213------2009----(beginning 10/01) 1994--1,094,717------2002----955,310 http://tinyurl.com/6l5y9p FACT: In the last 22 years, over 26 million illegals, have been apprehended, after crossing the border, into our United States. THE PROBLEM IS: Less than 1, out of 4 illegals, are estimated to have been apprehended.

Author

Buzzm1

Date

2008-11-09T11:06:22-06:00

ID

140483

Comment

You are quite right, Buzz, that I should not have called you a jackass, which is why I tried to be more measured in what I posted later. I was offended that you used terms like "illegals" to describe human beings guilty of misdemeanor violations of immigration law. Illegal is not a noun. Calling the arrival of immigrants an "invasion" is offensive. I am not a member of La Raza. I am, in fact, a contributing editor and former managing editor of the Jackson Free Press. Why do you think La Raza is racist? Oh, and I think we all understand by now that you have a table of figures you think means something. Posting it again is trolling.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2008-11-09T11:53:36-06:00

ID

140484

Comment

Brian C. Johnson, illegals have absolutely no right to be in our United States. It is against our Federal laws. It is also against our Federal laws for an illegal, to be employed by anyone, anywhere, within our United States. Yet, illegals, using forged, falsified, or stolen identities, have illegally obtained up 8.7 million jobs; jobs that rightfully belong to American workers. It's time for E-Verify to be mandated for all employees, for all employers, and for any benefit. Relative to my use of the term "invasion" when 40-50 million illegals illegally enter a country, what else would it be called. Our United States has 40 million of our own working poor, without the unlawful invasion of 40-50 million working poor of other countries, who are taking those benefits meant for our own citizens. Illegals are not welcome in our United States and they have to leave, whether you like it, or not. Enforce our existing laws.

Author

Buzzm1

Date

2008-11-09T12:08:44-06:00

ID

140485

Comment

in·va·sion (n-vzhn) n. 1. The act of invading, especially the entrance of an armed force into a territory to conquer. 2. A large-scale onset of something injurious or harmful, such as a disease. 3. An intrusion or encroachment. illegal 2 entries found. 1illegal (adjective) 2illegal (noun) Main Entry: 2illegal Function: noun Date: 1939 : an illegal immigrant

Author

Buzzm1

Date

2008-11-09T12:26:55-06:00

ID

140486

Comment

I appreciate what you're saying about the working poor and the unemployed. The thing that seems strange about it is that the same conservatives who keep shouting from the mountaintops about illegal immigration also oppose unions, raising the minimum wage, universal health care, and other measures that would have a far greater benefit to working people than immigration reform. Also, if undocumented workers have taken 8.7 million jobs (source for this figure?), how is it that they cost us $9,000 a year, or $300 billion a year? (Again, a source?) Your arguments seem ad hoc, as if you're grabbing whatever is at hand. My problem with e-verify is that this last election should have made it obvious how flawed government databases are. Thousands of legitimate voters were thrown off the rolls (until legal action restored them) because of errors in government databases. Again, usually conservatives rail against the incompetence of government, but here, you trust government to work perfectly. It seems obvious that such errors would be set aside for a lily-white guy like myself and taken seriously for someone who is Latino, whether he is a citizen or not. Finally, how on Earth could you deport 40 to 50 million people? (That number is too high by at least 30 million. Source?) The human suffering that would cause, to both immigrants and citizens alike, is hard to imagine. Justice requires a proportionate response to violations of the law. Ethnic cleansing is not proportionate. I do not want to live in a country where we send the military door to door rounding up people and loading them onto cattle cars because they crossed our border to look for work. Such a government would rightly be called Nazi.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2008-11-09T12:30:08-06:00

ID

140488

Comment

undocumented workers have taken 8.7 million jobs (source for this figure? Look no further than the Pew Hispanic Center and the DHS. 8.7 million is the number of known conflicts between SS numbers, and the workers who are using them. Each illegal immigrant, on average, costs American taxpayers $9,000 more per year, than they contribute in taxes. Illegals, fall into the category known as working poor; they earn very little, and thus contribute very little in taxes. Only 1/2 of working illegals pay any withholding taxes at all. These numbers are based on calculations by the Heritage Group, and verified by at least three other think tanks. E-Verify is more than 99.5% accurate: • As of the first half of FY 2007, only one-half of one percent of eligible employees screened had to take additional steps to obtain work authorization; overall, the system is 99.5% accurate. • More than 93 percent of employees are verified within five seconds; another 1.2 percent are verified within 24 hours. A new Photo Screening Tool and a streamlined procedure for naturalized citizens to receive authorization are increasing accuracy and efficiency for employers and employees; naturalized citizens no longer need to take remedial action at Social Security. • About 5 percent of new employees are not confirmed as work authorized, mirroring the same percentage of illegal aliens estimated to be in the labor force. Debunking the "E-Verify Error Rate" http://www.dhs.gov/journal/leadership/2008/05/debunking-e-verify-error-rate.html Debunking the "E-Verify Capacity Problem" http://www.dhs.gov/journal/leadership/2008/05/debunking-e-verify-capacity-problem.html Debunking Three More E-Verify Myths http://www.dhs.gov/journal/leadership/labels/E-Verify.html Although you say they are only figures, the following numbers are facts: I defy anyone to argue that there are only 12 million illegals in our United States, based on the following facts: UNITED STATES BORDER APPREHENSIONS (Source DHS/CBP) 1987--1,190,488------1995--1,394,554------2003----931,557 1988--1,008,145------1996--1,649,986------2004--1,160,395 1989----954,243------1997--1,412,953------2005--1,189,075 1990--1,169,939------1998--1,555,776------2006--1,089,902 1991--1,197,875------1999--1,579,010------2007----876,704 1992--1,258,482------2000--1,676,438------2008----723,825 1993--1,327,259------2001--1,266,213------2009----(beginning 10/01) 1994--1,094,717------2002----955,310 FACT: In the last 22 years, over 26 million illegals, have been apprehended, after crossing the border, into our United States. THE PROBLEM IS: Less than 1, out of 4 illegals, are estimated to have been apprehended. According to the U.S. Immigration Service another 6 million illegals in this country are visa overstays. That is, they got a visa legally in their home country, they came here to visit and then they never left.

Author

Buzzm1

Date

2008-11-09T13:14:14-06:00

ID

140490

Comment

The Fiscal Cost of Low-Skill Immigrants to the U.S. Taxpayer http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/SR14es.cfm The Fiscal Cost of Low-Skill Immigrants to State and Local Taxpayers http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/tst052107a.cfm

Author

Buzzm1

Date

2008-11-09T13:21:21-06:00

ID

140491

Comment

Brian's got more seniority. ;-) That said, I think everyone here can have the conversation civilly. And without re-reading all this carefully, I will say, Buzz, that we have already tread a lot of this territory, especially when it comes to the definition of "illegals." This is a logical fallacy that we have debunked many times, when it comes to a discussion of what immigration policy should be (meaning, what should be "illegal"): Brian C. Johnson, illegals have absolutely no right to be in our United States. It is against our Federal laws. Thus, discuss what should or should not be illegal, but don't make sweeping statements about "illegals" because that makes no sense in such a discussion about what/who should be illegal. You are welcome to express your opinion here, but you should be aware that we do not allow bigotry, including against some sweeping category of "illegals." "Illegals" are human beings, and your comments should respect that fact at *all* times and be respectful of those with other opinions, which will draw equally disrespectful comments in response. If not, leave. Your choice. My site. Also, I now see that you talked about "anchor babies" above; Brian's response was merited. This site does NOT allow jackasses to come on here and rail against American babies, no matter who their parents are. Because it's Sunday, and I'm in a real good mood about the election Tuesday, I will allow you one more chance. But you will be suspended if you do not (a) discuss/disagree respectfully, (b) lose the bigoted statements about "anchor babies" and "illegals" and (c)not repeat the same thing more than once (that is trolling). This is not a site for this kind of spewing (which only hurts your case anyway). Don't do it here again. Trolls are not welcome on this site.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-11-09T13:27:07-06:00

ID

140493

Comment

Is there any wonder why there aren't more posters on this site. You don't want to hear about the damage illegals are doing to our country. Despite this being Sunday, please, by all means, cancel my registration on your site. Who would ever want to post here??

Author

Buzzm1

Date

2008-11-09T14:04:33-06:00

ID

140494

Comment

It's not that we don't want to hear about "illegals" and the damage they do to our country, Buzz. If you had read the thread I posted for you above, you would see that we have already debated these issues. We banned use of the term "anchor baby" because it is patently offensive. We are actually being too generous with you by paying any attention at all. Go read up on our earlier discussions if you really want to convince us that you have an intelligible point to make. Still, I'll try to engage. I do not regard the Heritage Foundation as a reputable source. It is an open question whether undocumented workers actually cost the rest of us money. Other sources argue that because such workers pay into social security with no chance of ever drawing benefits, they actually subsidize that program for everyone else. This goes directly to the point I made above. How can undocumented workers both take jobs from working-class Americans and also require government support? Wouldn't working-class Americans need similar levels of support if they held those jobs? Or is it all just a smokescreen put forth by conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation? Forgive me if I do not trust the Department of Homeland Security to offer an unbiased evaluation of the success of its own programs. According to me, I'm right 99.5 percent of the time, but outsiders might want to conduct an audit. ;) Where is your "1 in 4" figure coming from? If there are 50 million illegal immigrants in the United States, that means 1 out of 6 Americans are here illegally. That's obviously not true. Even the Border Patrol puts the maximum at 20 million, according to the Christian Science Monitor. It doesn't help your credibility when you wildly exaggerate throughout your arguments. Now go catch up on our earlier discussion of this subject.

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2008-11-09T14:30:55-06:00

ID

140495

Comment

Who would ever want to post here?? Perhaps the thousands of members who do not come on here and use offensive epithets like "anchor baby" or even "illegals." One can have an intelligent discussion about immigration policy without being a bigot toward American citizens and non-citizens alike. One cannot, on the other hand, have an intelligent conversation about immigration with people who use that kind of language. It would be like trying to talk intelligently about race issues with someone who throws around the n-word to refer to black people. Can't happen.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-11-09T15:05:41-06:00

ID

140496

Comment

How would anyone know how many "In Violation Of Immigration Law" immigrants :) are even in the county or getting government support? What are they doing going to the welfare offices and saying "Hey, I am here, in violation of immigration laws, but I still want help?" Undocumented workers aren't going to apply for help for fear of getting caught, the documented one don't even trust the government enough to apply for help in most cases. While something does need to be done to slow the number of immigrants coming here illegally, you can't realistically expect our country to deport the millions already here, that will never happen.

Author

BubbaT

Date

2008-11-09T15:51:33-06:00

ID

140498

Comment

Good posts, folks. This is addressed mainly to Buzzm and any lurkers who are sympathetic to his point of view: "Anchor babies" are U.S. citizens, not undocumented immigrants, so really a citizen-first immigration policy would be one that would look out, first and foremost, for the well-being of these vulnerable citizens. Folks who are concerned about undocumented workers would be well served to focus on enforcement of labor laws, not immigration laws. If undocumented workers are being paid sub-minimum wage, nail the employers for it. If undocumented workers are being forced to work in hazardous conditions, nail the employers for it. And if undocumented workers are being raped by their employers (which happens VERY often), sure as hell nail the employers for it. Do this often enough and undocumented immigration will drop simply because the illegal but seldom-prosecuted exploitation of undocumented workers will no longer be viable, and they will be placed on equal competitive footing with U.S. citizens. But that's crazy talk, because the government has never been interested in targeting employers instead of immigrants, and neither has the nativist movement. Which is why I kinda just favor amnesty at this point. We screwed this up so badly that the only realistic option left is to forgive the 12 million immigrants already here and start over with a new, more viable system for the next round of folks.

Author

Tom Head

Date

2008-11-10T01:51:44-06:00

ID

140502

Comment

I know a woman who is in this country illegally. She works as a maid for low wages and lives in a two room apartment in a very rough section of Brooklyn. Even in these hard economic times I sincerely wonder if there are going to be long lines of people hankering for the chance to replace her or to wander from place to place picking beans. I have some unemployed citizen relatives who, to their detriment in my opinion, consider such jobs beneath their dignity and would rather sit around. That's the sad truth. At one point, after I had graduated with a bachelors degree, my primary job did not pay enough to finance my lifestyle so I worked a second job waiting tables. Many of those same relatives without such educational credentials would not have worked bussing or waiting tables. Probably half of my co-workers were from Mexico. I can't site any source for these anecdotes, only direct experience. It is sad that minorities are scapegoated in hard economic times. I am sure that practicing economists will point out that if it were not for businesses that exploit the labor of immigrants, we would pay higher prices for much of our vegetables and fruits. The last thing we need in these hard economic times are higher food prices. Is there any limit on how many times you can post the same thing here?

Author

FreeClif

Date

2008-11-10T09:20:59-06:00

ID

140505

Comment

Yes, there is, Whitley. Buzzm1 is a troll of the most obvious kind, and is now suspended.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-11-10T09:44:24-06:00

ID

140562

Comment

Perhaps the thousands of members who do not come on here and use offensive epithets like "anchor baby" or even "illegals." I guess I don't see the offensiveness of using the term "illegals" it's just shorthand for illegal immigrants or aliens. The "N" word is completely different as it does imply race. The former implies an illegal action taken by choice. Illegal immigrants choose to break our laws. They should be deported when caught. Can we deport them all? Why couldn't we? We can put people on the moon but we can't move people a few thousand miles? We can't, however, if we don't try or don't want to in the first place. I have to agree with Tom Head though (except for the amnesty part) if we changed policies to one where the incentives for people to come to our country illegally were gone they would self deport and we wouldn't have it to worry about it.

Author

WMartin

Date

2008-11-11T12:05:46-06:00

ID

140563

Comment

WMartin- Your talking about deporting millions of people. Sure the government could do it, but it would make what the Nazis did in WWII look like a church picnic.

Author

BubbaT

Date

2008-11-11T12:25:04-06:00

ID

140565

Comment

BubbaT is exactly right. There have already been too many reports of CITIZENS being deported mistakenly to Mexico. I would be afraid also. One of my great grandparents came from the *reservation* in Choctaw. One of my former Hispanic co-workers told me that I looked like his people in Piedras Negras, Mexico which was reputed to have been a haven for the so-called *black Seminoles* as they fled the U.S. to escape persecution. I don't speak much Spanish. I'd have a hard time in Mexico. We need to address the incentives for them to come here.

Author

FreeClif

Date

2008-11-11T12:35:56-06:00

ID

140591

Comment

BubbaT, No. What I'm talking about is enforcing the law. If the law is broken we should fix it. To just pretend it doesn't exist isn't working. I don't believe we should start rounding people up to deport them, but when they are caught we should send them home. It's the law. Whitley, those hundreds of people at Howard Industries weren't picking watermelons and sweet potatoes. They were doing jobs that American citizens, Mississippians, should have held. Our citizens don't need that kind of wage undercutting competition in hard economic times either.

Author

WMartin

Date

2008-11-12T08:59:21-06:00

ID

140592

Comment

I agree with the distinction Wmartin. Any solution needs to be a scalpel approach rather than a hatchet job that scoops up bean pickers and citizens in the process. I just have qualms about overreactions and unrealistic goals such as that we can deport ALL of the millions of undocumented workers like *presto pronto*. A serious solution will have to be multi-faceted and would take time. It should have provisions for a path to legalization or documentation for those in areas that U.S. citizen labor will not fill the gap so that the economy is not shocked at a time when it cannot take much more.

Author

FreeClif

Date

2008-11-12T09:06:34-06:00

ID

140594

Comment

One of the arguments I have heard from the people who oppose amnesty is that Mexicans, in particular, and some Latinos, in General, are not really interested in acclimating to American culture like previous waves of immigrants from Europe and Asia. That they are not truly interested in becoming U.S. citizens other than for the economic benefit of themselves. I don't know if this is true or not. If it is true wouldn't a guest worker program be a better solution? I would like to hear what everyone else thinks.

Author

WMartin

Date

2008-11-12T09:49:16-06:00

ID

140596

Comment

Just let me say I think the republicans are doing good work on the immigration matter. When are they going to start telling Asians what they think of them too. You know we do have quite a sizable portion of those here too. We already know how they feel about American Indians, Blacks/Africans/Caribbeans, Liberals, Mexicans/Spanish/Latina, Democrats, Progressives and to some degree Independents. Keep up the good work republicans. Y'all are doing a fine job of working yourself back home.

Author

Walt

Date

2008-11-12T10:04:19-06:00

ID

140597

Comment

Wmartin, I lived in Austin, Texas for eight years before moving back to MS. Most of the people I hung out with were Mexican American. I only have my own experience to rely on rather than data, but that experience makes me believe that they do acclimate to American culture rather well after a time. A couple of my close friends were citizens whose parents had immigrated to the U.S. legally from Monterrey, Mexico. They were so well integrated into our culture that they offended me somewhat by referring to Hispanics not born here as *beaners* and *wetbacks*. It reminded me of Af/Ams who use the N word. They, who were only one generation removed from Mexico, seemed to look down on the new immigrants. Part of that may be due to the fact that they had been victims of a violent crime committed by illegal Mexican immigrants. I was surprised at the number of second generation Mexican Americans who could not speak more Spanish than me. We must be wary of assumptions! The world is not a black and white deal as portrayed so myopically by the extreme right wing. Grays are the dominant feature! Complexity is the norm.

Author

FreeClif

Date

2008-11-12T10:13:36-06:00

ID

140598

Comment

WMartin- They do deport the people they catch, they deported 1.2 million+ in 2007 according the Home Land Sec. reports http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/YrBk07En.shtm Most of the migrant workers I employed in the past didn't want to become U.S. citizens, they just wanted to come here to work and make money to send their families because there was no work or govt. help in Mexico. So it was either work in the U.S. or their families starve to death.

Author

BubbaT

Date

2008-11-12T10:22:28-06:00

ID

140612

Comment

I'm pretty sure the main reason the Republican Party opposes immigration, no matter what they say, is because 12 million new citizens who vote primarily Democratic would contribute to a national Democratic majority. (Remember: 4 million new white evangelical voters showing up in 1980 gave us the Reagan/Bush era.) But if they can get the part of their base that is already wrapped-up-in-the-flag, gun-toting, racist and xenophobic, etc. to show up and vote over this issue, then that makes a very effective political strategy. At least until Latino voters start showing up en masse, at which point the strategy looks a lot less smart. We saw the first signs of that last Tuesday and that's not the worst Republicans will get of it.

Author

Tom Head

Date

2008-11-12T15:54:51-06:00

ID

140614

Comment

Given the fact that the Hispanic vote contributed heavily to several new Congressmen and victories in Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada and Florida, I will be surprised if we do not see significant immigration reform in the very near future. That is one piece of legislation that the opposition cannot afford to filibuster or they will seal their fate in 2012. The Republican Party, if anything will want to co-sponsor the legislation. They MUST get back some of the Latino vote or they will be taken to the woodshed again. If not, Texas in next. That would be a fatal blow.

Author

FreeClif

Date

2008-11-12T16:23:15-06:00

ID

140616

Comment

But Tom the republican party had made tremendous leeway with mexicans/latinos for a while. Bush even used his mexican nephew or close relative to help show interest in that community. The republicans had a shot at the mexicans/latinos vote until the immigration matter came up. I'm so glad they're acting like racists. We Democrats need to treat that community with respect and assistance so as to sure up their votes forever. Most of all, it's the humane and moral thing to do.

Author

Walt

Date

2008-11-12T16:26:03-06:00

ID

140628

Comment

Walt, I agree--actually Bush was GREAT on immigration policy by Republican standards. It's one of the very few issues where I really really liked him in 2000/2004 because he repudiated the "deport them all" language of his fellow Republicans. But he was a minority in his own party--far too much of a centrist. McCain was also great on immigration, but he too was a minority in his party and by the time he got the nomination, the party had long since been successfully branded by HR 4437 in 2006 and the rhetoric surrounding it. Not to mention the Republican presidential primary, in which even McCain moved to the right. The truth is that now it's probably much too late for the Republican Party to save itself on immigration. It's just going to have to wait until immigration is a non-issue and hope that it can peel away enough non-white voters to win another national election one day.

Author

Tom Head

Date

2008-11-13T00:55:07-06:00

ID

140629

Comment

Whitley, I agree. From a strictly political point of view, the smartest thing Democrats can do within the next two years is pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill. If the fight over the bill breaks down the way I expect it to, with the most visible Republicans opposing it and the most visible Democrats supporting it, it will virtually guarantee that 2010 is as good for the Democrats as 2008 was. Hell, it might even lay the groundwork for another Democratic presidential landslide in 2012. And I wouldn't worry about a Republican filibuster. Even if the Senate works out to 57-43, there are at least four Republicans who openly support comprehensive immigration reform. And the House can't filibuster. So whatever happens, I think it's a safe bet that the Democratic Party will get the immigration reform bill it wants. And it should want the immigration reform bill that the majority of American Latinos want--one that includes a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented.

Author

Tom Head

Date

2008-11-13T00:58:31-06:00

ID

140758

Comment

Ladd, Whitley, Johnson and BubbaT, I am truly disappointed at your treatment of Buzz, especially when compared to your treatment of that Amalie guy who posted under "What We Conservatives. Learned, etc". By the way, why hasn't Amalie responded to any of the posts responding to his article,or is this guy a marketing "ghost creation" of JFP? Continuing on,, Ladd,you discounted Buzz's use of the word "illegal's" by saying things as inocuous as "what does he mean by illegal?" and "we've already discounted the term "illegals" in a previous thread". As casual observer of your tirads against the data Buzz provides from the US government, and his perfectly reasonable coinage of the phrase "anchor babies" as a short way of expressing a concept he cleatly defines, I can only say, I have seen a side of you guy that is neither socially attractive nor intellictually vigorous. Ladd, you didn't allow me to post "Only two kinds of people are Republican..the rich and fools" on another blog, and yet you and your enlightened staff call Buzz a "jackass" and a "troll". The former being less literary than the latter. What's up? Your responses remind of exatly how exactly how I "DIDN'T" want Obama to respond to the race baiting tactics of the Carter and McCain/Palin campaigns during the elections. I apologised to you for my "un-posted" Republican/fools comment. Perhaps you guys owe Buzz an apology for you "posted comments..maybe Please take a deep breath before you answer me. Hey, you guys are bigger than this. PS: Tom Head - I really appreciated your more level headed comments. The intellectual courtesy you exended to Buzz was most refreshing.

Author

FrankMickens

Date

2008-11-17T15:06:50-06:00

ID

140759

Comment

Casual, I take deep breaths all the time. Here's the difference, and it's stark: Buzz came on here to troll and tell off people. He started screaming about "anchor babies" almost immediately (which is an ethnic/bigoted epitaph of our time). He posted the same thing over and over again. He was here for a fight. We do not allow bigoted statements about immigrants any more than we do about black people. We gave him the opportunity to straighten up and be respectful toward "the other, but he wasn't willing. If not, you're not welcome here. And if you insist on jackassery, I and other editors (such as Brian) will respond in terms that will get your attention. We don't care who you are, or what your views are, as you know. And please stop being ridiculous about Amile not posting yet, and whether he is fake. He is real, and is known by many people around the city. He can post if he wants, or not (note that not all our writers post, nor are they required to). Note that it is in the User Agreement not to hassle people about responding to you. It is also in the User Agreement that you will not derail conversations complaining about the way we moderate our site. You are welcome to write me directly if you wish, but I don't have a lot else to say to you about it.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-11-17T15:16:55-06:00

ID

140763

Comment

Ladd, I know that I am trying to post this publically at my own peril, but her it goes. Let me see if I've got this straight. You, as moderator and owner of the site, have reserved the right to publically rant, rail and curse about people who post things in the style, language and font you don't agree with, but if your users have an issue with the quality of your moderation, we must do it in private. You, as moderator and owner of the site, can self define terms you do not agree with (anchor babies, fools, etc) as bigoted , but you can publically call people jackasses and trolls at will. You, as moderator and owner of the site, can respond to someone YELLING and repeating them selves by calling them bigoted and jackasses. Of course I know the answers to all of these questions is yes. What disappoints me is that these are the same tactics used by Rush Limbaugh and his ilk. Why could't you and your staff responded to Buzz the way Tom Head did..with intellectual and social courtesy and vigor? Buzz baited, not the blogging usres of the site, but the moderators and owners of the site. The users responded with courtesy and intelligence. The owners and moderators responded "in kind" with threats, profanity and the spiteful use of their inherit power. Ladd, I know you guys are better than this! In my opinion, had you left Buzz alone, the users of the site would have handled Buzz very effectively...with ideas, crafted arguments and eventually with the silence of the snub. Please don't hide behind that juvenile (in my opinion)responses "he did it first" and "don't derail the conversation with complaints (constructive critisism) of the way the site is moderated. Is this a forum open to all ideas and communications styles, or just an organ for the ideas of the owners and moderators? Can we all not learn from each other? Can we all respectfully agree to disagree, respectfully? Yes we can! Ladd, if you choose not to post this constructive criticism I would appreciate at least an e-mail response.

Author

FrankMickens

Date

2008-11-17T15:58:21-06:00

ID

140764

Comment

Casual, I have explained our moderation policy over and over again. It works very well, and I'm not in the market to change it or spend time stating the same thing over and over and over again, either here or in e-mail. People have to take personal responsibility for their words. If someone comes on my site and bashes American babies, as Buzz did, then he may well get called a jackass by an editor here, as we express to them that they have stumbled onto the wrong site. There are certain things I have no patience for, and that includes using my site for blatant bigotry. That has nothing to do with an intelligent discussion of what immigration is, or should be, and how we should define what is "illegal" going forward. But humans are humans, not "illegals." And smears against American-born children are off-limits. Meantime, this thread is about Wicker and immigration. Please post on topic, per the user agreement, or do not post. Your choice.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-11-17T16:08:14-06:00

ID

141015

Comment

Author

WMartin

Date

2008-11-27T09:10:20-06:00

ID

141016

Comment

Casual, I did engage Buzz on the topic, and quite thoughtfully. I posted links to our earlier discussions of the subject, but I also discussed at some length with him the problems with his argument. It's true that I called him a name in my first post, but as I explained, I posted that way because I found his post offensive. I then stepped back and engaged him respectfully and at greater length than his posts deserved, frankly. Part of the problem with the way that he posted is that he ignored well-sourced responses that showed his "facts" were nonsense. One in six Americans are illegal immigrants? But people like him just keep repeating the same points over and over, even when they have been proven wrong in the public square. How does that advance the debate? Buzz treated this thread as if it was a telephone pole on which he could staple anti-immigrant agit-prop, but that's not what it is. This wonderful internets offer plenty of other venues for that sort of shouting, and indeed, he repeatedly posted links to a site that does just that. So the First Amendment is alive and well, and Buzz did nothing to help his argument. Do you have anything to write about immigration?

Author

Brian C Johnson

Date

2008-11-27T22:46:56-06:00

ID

141017

Comment

Just a quick note to let everybody know that there will be a march to the Capitol, asking for the repeal of the anti-immigrant SB 2988 and an end to the federal raids, next Thursday (12/4) at 2pm. Call (601) 968 5182 for more information. By the way, still no indictments of any Howard Industries managers, as far as I know. Which is typical. Don't hold your breath waiting for any, either. The effective function of raids like this is to make immigrants realize that when abusive managers threaten to have them deported if they go to the police, that threat is credible. The employers who rape undocumented workers in the Southwest and on the West Coast will sleep a little easier now, thanks to the loyal support of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. And SB 2988, which (as we all predicted) is not actually being enforced against employers, will be another way in which the government makes itself complicit in the abuse of undocumented workers.

Author

Tom Head

Date

2008-11-27T23:03:02-06:00

ID

141054

Comment

Brian, I took the time to review the prevous thread you referred Buzzm1 to. http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/index.php/site/comments/amnesty_for_gang_bangers/ To my chagrin, the previous discussion was very similiar to the exchange of comments on this thread. On the immigration issue, I have to agree with most of the comments made regarding "follow the current law". You and ladd kept using the Civil Rights experience as an excuse for not following the law because the Jim Crow Laws of the South (and the North) were immoral. What you and ladd failed to consider is that when the Civil Rights protestors "peacefully" broke the law they were all prosecuted to the fullest extent of that law. They went to jail. They went to jail in droves. Their willing numbers totally overwhelmed the Southern justice system. In addition, not only were they prosecuted by the law they were fired from their jobs, threatened, beaten, and otherwie physically abused. In my opionion this being willing to suffer the legal consequences of the immoral laws, was the most genius part of the non-violent movement, as originated by Ghandi and adapted by King. By being willing to go to jail, the peaceful protestors brought light to the problem for more sane and moral majority of the US to see the immorality of the laws....up close and personal. In my opinion, the most powerful and expeditious tactic anyone wanting to "upgrade" our immigration laws is for the "people who are in this country without having gone through the required, codified and proper channels, procedures and legal iterations cited in our current immigration laws (i.e. illegals)", is for them to surrender enmasse to immigration, local and Federal law enforcement. This destabilizing and morally embarressing event would certainly lead to emergency and immediate action by Congress....to everyone's benefit.

Author

FrankMickens

Date

2008-11-30T22:21:01-06:00

ID

141058

Comment

Casual, thank you for discussing the issue in much of your last post, even though you are managing to couch it in personal terms, nevertheless. As for the continued whining about the way the editors moderate this site, you are in violation of the User Agreement and, I suspect, are trying to test me and rile me up. We both know you have a history on this site and in e-mail to our users, which you have have suspended for in the past if I recall correctly. I suggest you not test me. I have no hesitation in deleting you for trying to start a fight and never thinking about you again. Thus, I will delete your whining before it spirals this thread off-topic again, and allow you one more chance to stay on topic and not troll for a fight with me or anyone else. This is not the place for it.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2008-12-01T10:18:16-06:00