Should this lass be thrown out of the US of A ?

[Bugfatty300]

The worst part about illegal immigration, and those who do not seek enforcement, is that a certain group from one desperate nation has seemingly free access to America. While billions in other countries that are just as desperate have to wade through an impossibly long process, and wait years to earn the privilege. One group does it legally, the other trounces all over our laws, and for whatever reason people tolerate this crap. A Mexican has no greater right to come here than a person from any other country. Yet they receive an unbelievable level of favorable treatment in all circles -- just because they're Mexican. It's disgusting.

Actually people come from all over the world on some visa or another then they simply don't leave.

 

[.Shane.]

I see a new trend of pleading the 5th when filling out address information.

 

[Traitorfish]

The worst part about illegal immigration, and those who do not seek enforcement, is that a certain group from one desperate nation has seemingly free access to America. While billions in other countries that are just as desperate have to wade through an impossibly long process, and wait years to earn the privilege. One group does it legally, the other trounces all over our laws, and for whatever reason people tolerate this crap. A Mexican has no greater right to come here than a person from any other country. Yet they receive an unbelievable level of favorable treatment in all circles -- just because they're Mexican. It's disgusting.

And has it not, perhaps, crossed your mind that the reason the majority of illegals are Latin American (noting that plenty of them aren't "Mexican", at least if we're to use the term as something other than a palatable version of "spic") is because only two countries share a land-border with the US, and the ones up top don't really need to bother? Illegals can and do arrive from other countries, it's simply too complicated and expensive an undertaken for it to be a major issue; most who do are, as Buggyfatty suggests, over-staying a visa, and so are easily able to keep up the appearances of legality. Latin Americans just need to turn North and start walking, and so provided the most numerous and, just as important, the most visible form of illegal immigration. Equally, plenty of Latin American immigrants, if not most, enter the country through entirely legal means and pursue both residency and citizenship through the proper channels.

Nobody is suggesting that these individuals in particular have any greater right to entry because they are Latino, let alone "Mexican". I'm honestly not sure who you think these people are, or why they would propose such a thing. As strawmen go, it's not even poor, it's just, well, baffling.

 

[downtown]

Arent her parents illegal too? Why separate them? Send em all back and make em do it right.

But as to your point, you may be right, but its been awhile since I looked it up so I dont recall. There are exceptions to everything though, I do know that. She could have asked for one in her case.

I don't think you can personally apply until you're 18 (unless you are emancipated).

The Valedictorian of my HS graduating class had her student visa expire 2 weeks before graduation (where she was set to speak). The Feds wouldn't give her an extra 14 day stay, and she had to go back to Bulgaria for 6 months while they let her renew (missing her first semester at Yale). The process has so many incentives to lie, its crazy.

 

[MobBoss]

I don't think you can personally apply until you're 18 (unless you are emancipated).

The Valedictorian of my HS graduating class had her student visa expire 2 weeks before graduation (where she was set to speak). The Feds wouldn't give her an extra 14 day stay, and she had to go back to Bulgaria for 6 months while they let her renew (missing her first semester at Yale). The process has so many incentives to lie, its crazy.

Well, my only counter to that is that if the process has many incentives to lie, then in turn, it should have many incentives to not lie as well. More so probably.

However, I fully admit that immigration reform is badly needed in our nation and the process to become a citizen far from perfect. It does need to be changed, but until it is changed, its what we have to deal with. And it seems to me that since thousands and thousands deal with it without having to lie, then I dont really have a lot of sympathy for those that choose to do so.

 

[Merkinball]

Actually people come from all over the world on some visa or another then they simply don't leave. - Bugfatty

You're right. They do. But the number of people who do that compared to people of Hispanic origin is minuscule.

And has it not, perhaps, crossed your mind that the reason the majority of illegals are Latin American (noting that plenty of them aren't "Mexican", at least if we're to use the term as something other than a palatable version of "spic") is because only two countries share a land-border with the US, and the ones up top don't really need to bother? - Traitorfish

Yeah, uhhh, I said that. I mean, I didn't use racist language like you, or imply a racist connotation like you'd love to foist on me, but yeah. Duh.

Illegals can and do arrive from other countries, it's simply too complicated and expensive an undertaken for it to be a major issue; most who do are, as Buggyfatty suggests, over-staying a visa, and so are easily able to keep up the appearances of legality. Latin Americans just need to turn North and start walking, and so provided the most numerous and, just as important, the most visible form of illegal immigration. Equally, plenty of Latin American immigrants, if not most, enter the country through entirely legal means and pursue both residency and citizenship through the proper channels. - Traitorfish

Thank you for that wonderful bounty of information that has nothing to do with my post. Why are you telling me this? This is common sense.

Nobody is suggesting that these individuals in particular have any greater right to entry because they are Latino, let alone "Mexican". I'm honestly not sure who you think these people are, or why they would propose such a thing. As strawmen go, it's not even poor, it's just, well, baffling. - Traitorfish

Strawman indeed.

Hispanics in particular are a political demographic group that BOTH political parties wish to secure. They're the largest growing demographic, and illegals are an enormous POTENTIAL voting block. Nobody cares about Vietnamese women that come over in shipping container because there's like 10,000 of them, and 10,000,000 freakin' Hispanics. Therefore, any policy that is anti illegal immigration is flattened upon its arrival to smear whatever party proposes it. Democrats in total are soft on illegal immigration because they want the Hispanic vote, and they want today's illegals to encompass tomorrow's voter base. And it's disgusting. They put the law on the backburner, and in the process they place their own political aspirations ahead of what is right.

It is patently unfair to people who are legally coming her to allow this girl to stay. It's not some African kid's fault that her parents broke the law. Send them back so that the African kid can have that education visa. Why should he punished for a law that someone else broke?

 

[warpus]

It can be a complex process and can take a lot of time, yes. But my question was had she even started the process? If so, that would at least show me that she was trying to do the right thing as opposed to trying to hide out under the radar.

The citizenship process can be long and difficult, but lets not forget there are thousands upon thousands that do it legally every single year. It can be accomplished if people want it bad enough. And to give people like this girl an exception slaps all those who did it legally right in the face. We shouldnt treat people who intentionally avoid or break the law equally with people who actually obey the law and do the right thing

From what I have heard the citizenship process has a lot of problems with it and is riddled with unnecessary bureaucracy, which is why a lot of people don't bother.

Maybe if the process was fixed more people would do things the legal way?

edit: I see that you said above that you think the immigration process needs to be reexamined and fixed. Good! As for this girl in particular,.. the only issue is that she can't get certain scholarships - scholarships reserved for citizens, right? She can still attend university in the U.S. even if she's an illegal immigrant, right?

Well, in that case, what the hell? There are cheaper secondary education alternatives elsewhere - such as in Canada. She could come study up here and get funded (to an extent). Heck, I couldn't afford $30,000 a year to go to a top-notch American University.. that's why I went to University here in Canada, where it's cheaper.

There are tons of scholarships I wasn't eligible for when I was a student - I wasn't complaining about that..

Maybe somebody should set up an "illegal immigrant" scholarship *shrug*

 

[MobBoss]

From what I have heard the citizenship process has a lot of problems with it and is riddled with unnecessary bureaucracy, which is why a lot of people don't bother.

Maybe if the process was fixed more people would do things the legal way?

Maybe. And maybe if we actually enforced immigation law like Arizona is about to, people would perhaps bother to do it right. If you dont enforce a law, then people have no reason to really obey it do they?

 

[Merkinball]

From what I have heard the citizenship process has a lot of problems with it and is riddled with unnecessary bureaucracy, which is why a lot of people don't bother.

Maybe if the process was fixed more people would do things the legal way? - Warpus

I doubt it. You're right that the immigration process has a lot of problems. There's no doubt about that. But even with that, there's still only X number of spots available for potential immigrants, and that quote is filled every year. Even if you streamline the process and kill most the hassle associated with it, people are not going to have the patience to play the waiting game for their time to come.

 

[I'm Cleo!]

Has anyone ever done a study of what would happen if we just removed the caps on immigration? The first thought is that we'd be overrun by immigrants, but is it true? And even if it is, would it be a bad thing?

Cleo

 

[Bugfatty300]

Hispanics in particular are a political demographic group that BOTH political parties wish to secure. They're the largest growing demographic, and illegals are an enormous POTENTIAL voting block. Nobody cares about Vietnamese women that come over in shipping container because there's like 10,000 of them, and 10,000,000 freakin' Hispanics. Therefore, any policy that is anti illegal immigration is flattened upon its arrival to smear whatever party proposes it. Democrats in total are soft on illegal immigration because they want the Hispanic vote, and they want today's illegals to encompass tomorrow's voter base. And it's disgusting. They put the law on the backburner, and in the process they place their own political aspirations ahead of what is right.

Assuming a significant portion of those 10,000,000 bother go through the trouble to fraudulently vote at all; why does 10,000,000 supposed votes from illegals more potent than the votes of the vast majority of the United States who are against illegal immigration?

It is patently unfair to people who are legally coming her to allow this girl to stay. It's not some African kid's fault that her parents broke the law. Send them back so that the African kid can have that education visa. Why should he punished for a law that someone else broke?

It's not the African kid's fault he was born in Africa. Why do you want to punish him just because he wasn't born in the USA? Just go ahead and say that you want open borders and free plane tickets for everyone because it's unfair to punish them for things that weren't their fault.

 

[MobBoss]

Has anyone ever done a study of what would happen if we just removed the caps on immigration? The first thought is that we'd be overrun by immigrants, but is it true? And even if it is, would it be a bad thing?

Cleo

Well, when Reagan gave amnesty to the illegals, did we get more illegals or less afterwards?

As to it being a bad thing, yes, it absolutely is. Part of the naturalization process is being assimilated to the language, culture and customs of the United States of America. We should allow people to move here that want to be Americans....not people that want to move here and turn America into their version of the country they came from. Take for example the recent fuss over the Cinco De Mayo holiday. If people are going to be viewed as troublemakers for actually honoring the US flag, even on whats considered a hispanic holiday, then somethings wrong in America. Now, I am not saying we shouldnt celebrate Cinco De Mayo......I will be more than happy to tip a corona or dos equis with anyone, but dont use it as a rallying cry against America. Thats the wrong message to send...especially when one is actually IN the USA.

 

[Merkinball]

Assuming a significant portion of those 10,000,000 bother go through the trouble to fraudulently vote at all; why does 10,000,000 supposed votes from illegals more potent than the votes of the vast majority of the United States who are against illegal immigration? - Bugfatty

Not what I'm saying. I doubt any more than a few handful of illegals get in to actually vote now. While there is some politiking going on for the current Hispanic vote, a larger, more important goal for both sides, is to be the party that pushes Amnesty through and get's today's current illegals to vote tomorrow. Whatever party does that will have 30,000,000 votes that will never go away.

It's not the African kid's fault he was born in Africa. Why do you want to punish him just because he wasn't born in the USA? Just go ahead and say that you want open borders and free plane tickets for everyone because it's unfair to punish them for things that weren't their fault. - Bugfatty

I'll respond to your point after you respond to mine.

Has anyone ever done a study of what would happen if we just removed the caps on immigration? The first thought is that we'd be overrun by immigrants, but is it true? And even if it is, would it be a bad thing? - Cleo

I believe it would be a terrible thing. If we did that you'd immediately get a massive influx of the worlds poorest and most uneducated people. Eventually I think you'd see some kind of equilibrium point. But I think the first two years you would end up seeing an incredible amount of people flood the country at all costs. We simply do not have the capacity or the ability to absorb millions of poor, uneducated people into our society and provide adequate social services (think sewer, electricity, clean water.) I'd be willing to bet that you'd see tent cities and shantytowns pop up all over the place.

 

[MobBoss]

It's not the African kid's fault he was born in Africa. Why do you want to punish him just because he wasn't born in the USA? Just go ahead and say that you want open borders and free plane tickets for everyone because it's unfair to punish them for things that weren't their fault.

First of all, I really have to ask. Why is being born in Africa a punishment? Is there something wrong with Africa?

Secondly, why is it considered punishment for people to comply with the legal process of naturalization and citizenship? People do it every day.

 

[I'm Cleo!]

As to it being a bad thing, yes, it absolutely is. Part of the naturalization process is being assimilated to the language, culture and customs of the United States of America. We should allow people to move here that want to be Americans....not people that want to move here and turn America into their version of the country they came from. Take for example the recent fuss over the Cinco De Mayo holiday. If people are going to be viewed as troublemakers for actually honoring the US flag, even on whats considered a hispanic holiday, then somethings wrong in America. Now, I am not saying we shouldnt celebrate Cinco De Mayo......I will be more than happy to tip a corona or dos equis with anyone, but dont use it as a rallying cry against America. Thats the wrong message to send...especially when one is actually IN the USA.

Switch "Cinco de Mayo" to "St. Patrick's Day" or "Feast of San Gennaro," (and the beer labels) and you could have written that paragraph 100 years ago.

Cleo

 

[warpus]

Maybe. And maybe if we actually enforced immigation law like Arizona is about to, people would perhaps bother to do it right. If you dont enforce a law, then people have no reason to really obey it do they?

And if a law is not enforced at all for decades, and officials look the other way, then people are just going to assume nobody cares and continue to break the law, be it jaywalking, illegal immigration, not paying their taxes, or whatever.

By refusing to enforce a law, the message to the community becomes "It's alright to do this" - which is one of the main reasons why there is such a huge illegal immigrant problem these days.. right?

 

[Traitorfish]

Thank you for that wonderful bounty of information that has nothing to do with my post. Why are you telling me this? This is common sense.

Well, given that you decided to engage in a bitter little anti-Mexican rant, it all seemed quite apt.

Strawman indeed.

Hispanics in particular are a political demographic group that BOTH political parties wish to secure.

Ah, so now it's "Hispanics", and not "Mexicans". Good to know that my response was noted.

They're the largest growing demographic, and illegals are an enormous POTENTIAL voting block. Nobody cares about Vietnamese women that come over in shipping container because there's like 10,000 of them, and 10,000,000 freakin' Hispanics. Therefore, any policy that is anti illegal immigration is flattened upon its arrival to smear whatever party proposes it. Democrats in total are soft on illegal immigration because they want the Hispanic vote, and they want today's illegals to encompass tomorrow's voter base. And it's disgusting. They put the law on the backburner, and in the process they place their own political aspirations ahead of what is right.

That's not really relevant to what you actually said, though. Legislation which aids illegal immigrants makes no preferences for ethnicity or nationality other than those which are implied by the particular geographic circumstances I referred to; the legislation may be motivated by the prevalence of illegals of a particular ethnicity or nationality, but this is in response to existing realities, as you yourself acknowledge.

It is patently unfair to people who are legally coming her to allow this girl to stay. It's not some African kid's fault that her parents broke the law. Send them back so that the African kid can have that education visa. Why should he punished for a law that someone else broke?

This is more or less just empty rhetoric.

 

[Bugfatty300]

Not what I'm saying. I doubt any more than a few handful of illegals get in to actually vote now. While there is some politiking going on for the current Hispanic vote, a larger, more important goal for both sides, is to be the party that pushes Amnesty through and get's today's current illegals to vote tomorrow. Whatever party does that will have 30,000,000 votes that will never go away.

I find it hard to believe that Hispanics in the US are as superficial as you think they are. Believe it or not many of them are themselves opposed to illegal immigration and consider other things when they cast a vote. Even so how is consolidating even 30,000,000 votes while alienating the other 200,000,000 votes a sound political strategy for Republicans or Democrats?

I'll respond to your point after you respond to mine.

If you're really concerned with being FAIR then you would let anyone and everyone enter the country as they wished. The world isn't fair.

 

[Quackers]

 

[Kerozine]

Iowa is something like 96% white.