In a guest column published June 19, David Michael Smith wrote that the website of Wayne Faircloth, Republican candidate for state representative in District 23, “contains some statements which reveal a disturbing bias against African-Americans and Hispanics.”

David Michael Smith’s guest column (“Campaign by Faircloth has disturbing views,” Daily News, June 19) contains all the usual liberal propaganda and accusations against legislative candidate Wayne Faircloth.

Among other things, Smith accuses Faircloth of “bigotry toward Hispanics” because Faircloth has made clear his opposition to illegal immigration.

Illegal immigration is a crime, and illegal immigrants are criminals.

There is nothing reprehensible about opposition to crime and criminals.

Smith, on the other hand, makes clear his bigotry by assuming that illegal immigrants are Hispanics.

Obviously, it is he, not Faircloth, who appears to be the bigot.

P.J. Bourgeois

Friendswood

(77) comments

GW Cornelius

Seems to me Smith was right.

Carlos Ponce

Island Runner, I have read Wayne Faircloth's website and find no hint of racism nor anti-Hispanic bias in it. What I find is that he disagrees with the president's policies. To equate that with with racism is sheer lunacy. What I find is that he wants the borders controlled. How in the world is that anti-Hispanic? So far 42,000 children from Central America have come to Texas. The Obama administration has planned on their arrival since January.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/government-advertised-in-january-for-escorts-for-65000-illegal-alien-children-to-be-resettled?f=must_reads
They travel through Mexico riding atop and between rail cars. Where is the public outcry?

Chris Gimenez

Carlos, you know the routine by now. The Left makes accusations and charges for which they provide not the slightest of proof and then their supporters make simpleton statements in adoring admiration. They have watched their boy president and community organizer go down in flames when he was supposed to be the Messiah. The only things he's improved on since he's been in office is his ability to lie and his golf handicap.

Jim Forsythe

bvresident

Have you heard of the term multitasking? Golf is suppose to be relaxing.
Are you asking this same question for John Boehner? He played 119 rounds like year.
Now, politics aside, whatever a president does to get away, whether it's golf, clearing brush (Bush),
chopping wood (Reagan), playing tennis, whatever...that's his business. We don't own the person, we just pay his salary.
What he does in his down time is nobody's business. Whomever complains, all I have to say is, how do you decompress,
and are you willing to take heat for it?

Chris Gimenez

Bigjim, that all sounds well and good but it's mostly common sense that the holder of the highest office in this country never really has "down time". He or she may be doing something other than our business but that's when the devil is in the details. Going to a fundraiser in Las Vegas while Benghazi burned and Americans died for example. As for John Boehner, he ain't running the country so nice try but no cigar.

But back to the root cause of the divisiness in this country-people like your president and the Socialist Smith and so many others on the left who try to use the "R" to demonize anyone who doesn't agree with them. It has become the modus operandi of the Entitlement Party and while some like KLang say it's coming from both parties-it really is only coming from the Left.

kevjlang
Kevin Lang

I figured out a long time ago that very little is one-sided. If you think the political rhetoric in Washington, or Austin, or anywhere else is one-sided, chances are that you're just denying that you're part of the problem, too. I don't care where you are in the political spectrum. We all own all the problems in this country. Even if you, personally, nor your party was directly involved in breaking it, it's still ours to fix. As they say, if you're pointing a finger at someone else, you have 3 pointing back at you.

kevjlang
Kevin Lang

If you want to pursue the illegal immigrants as criminals, fine. However, be consistent, and tell us how you plan to go about it. And, are you going to just go after the illegal immigrants, or are you going to also go after those that have abetted them while they're here? Are you going to go after the farmers, the construction companies, the cleaning services, and all the other businesses that have provided jobs for them? Are you going to go after all the landlords that rented to them? Are you going to go after the supermarkets that sold them the groceries they used to survive? The issue is so much more than just sealing the borders and rounding up millions to toss into jails or send them home in the backs of panel trucks. Once you remove all those people from the labor force, what gives you confidence that we have enough unemployed that are physically capable of even doing those jobs? And, what makes you think that the employers are going to be willing to take on those workers at the required minimum wages?

It's a big problem to solve. However, most of the politicians only want to grasp some of the low-hanging fruit, and do everything possible to avoid the deeper-rooted issues.

Anyone that thinks this is merely a "foreigner" issue is blind. Much of the illegal immigration problem is due to decades of the US government AND the US people turning a blind eye because we judged the economic benefits of illegal immigration to be far greater than the costs. Decades of letting the problem develop, and some politician looking for a rally cry decides that he's going to take the election on the premise that sealing the border is going to magically fix the problem. I'm not discounting the value or necessity to have better control of our international borders, but to infer that doing that alone is going to fix everything is like having a pharmacist fill your prescription with placebos.

Chris Gimenez

As usual Lang, you acquiesce to the hopelessness of solving the problem so the best option is to do nothing. Here's how I would do it.

Close the borders with Border Patrol, state law enforcement, and the U.S. military. Seal it off completely except through legal checkpoints.

State-by-state, every illegal that law enforcement makes contact with-deport them. Congress should make it law that anyone who knowingly hires illegals or fails to follow the required citizenship verification requirements is guilty of a felony if convicted and then start prosecuting.

Next, start with the states with the highest concentration of illegals and start moving them out. It'll take a while but it took a while to get to the point we're at now. As long as the borders are secure-and I know you'll come back with there's no way to make the perfectly secure but of course we can stop the massive movement going on now-they won't have the ability to come back. When Mexico is choking on the Central America illegals they'll secure their borders.

As for all the jobs they do here, that's easy. Let the employers provide their employment opportunities to the unemployed and if they're qualified they either take the job or lose their benefits. Problem solved.

kevjlang
Kevin Lang

I have never advocated doing nothing. You know that, but you like to spew that lie anyway. You'd rather buy into an empty promise from a politician that, if elected to the office he's running for, hasn't the capability of doing it.

Sure, it sounds simple to say that you take millions of people out of their jobs--people frequently getting paid below minimum wage--and you'll replace them one-for-one with people from the unemployment line--many of whom would be OVERQUALIFIED from a wage standpoint to take the jobs, and, who would command (by law) wages far above the workers they'd replace, and somehow workers and employers would think everything is hunky-dory? Somehow, a business that currently fills 3 positions for the daily cost of one minimum wage employee is going to just bow down and hire 3 people at minimum wage PLUS pay all the employer taxes on those workers, and there'd be no changes in anything else? How do you propose those employers to make up the difference?

Let's say you get laid off your job, and, let's assume you qualify for maximum unemployment benefits--in Texas, that's $454/week, or a bit more than $11/hr. Some farmer offers you a job for $7.25/hr. Are you going to willfully say that sounds fair? You take one big pay cut from your good-paying job to the unemployment line, and now you're going to go even further down to go grunt all day on someone's farm? If you think that's an equitable solution, perhaps you should just skip all the premises here, and just quit your job and go work for one of the farmers up Hwy 6.

I'll reiterate: I'm not discounting the value or necessity to have better control of our international borders, but to infer that doing that alone is going to fix everything is like having a pharmacist fill your prescription with placebos.

Jim Forsythe

I know everyone follows this
" If you pay your household employee cash wages of $1,900 or more in 2014, all cash wages you pay to that employee in 2014 (regardless of when the wages were earned) up to $117,000 are social security wages and all cash wages are Medicare wages. However, any noncash wages you pay do not count as social security and Medicare wages"
This is what everyone needs to be paying,
So if we are going to follow the law, anyone that has a person that mows yard, cleans house ect. needs to be paying this if You pay more than $1900 a year to them.

JBG JBG

You have a good point Mr. Lang, and let me say this and be clear about it! I have Hispanic nephews and nieces, and white in-laws. Hey, but when you are wrong, there is no HALF-WRONG! If you break the law, you did not HALF-BREAK it!
-
Now I took note of your point to be sure, but Mr. OBAMA has done absolutely NOTHING but talks about an immigration policy since he has been in that White House!
-
There is an Ole Chinese Proverbs which goes like this:

"Talk, Talk, Talk, All Time talk,....Much talk Not Get Rice Cooked!" Yall need to tell Mr. Obama to get off his rear end and stop posturing and get busy!!!!!!! NOW!!!!!!!
He ought to do a little something right before he leaves, wouldn't you say?
-
Ahhhhhhhahhahahahahahah ! Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! [smile]

kevjlang
Kevin Lang

The congress, too, has done little more than talk about, it, too. They even came close to a deal, but then, realizing they might be in agreement decided quickly to disagree.

Yes, our nation has talked about the problem for 30-40 years from my recollection. However, the talk hasn't gotten us anywhere. No one's going to do anything until they either come up with a plan that doesn't harm any of their big constituents, or until they decide that they're going to do the right thing, even if it costs them support of their big constituents. Solving this will require lots of compromises of ethics over money. How many people can we elect that can choose ethics over money? Probably not many, since many of the people voting would have to make the same choice.

As much as we may want to make this a law and order issue, it's more than that. It's also a pocketbook issue. And a few other factors, too that just add more fuel to the fire.

sverige1
Lars Faltskog

Here in the US...as the saying goes: "Todos somos mojados".

The only "natives" with the premise to try to say that "no one else belongs" is the Native Americans. As kevjlang points out, we have a multi-faceted problem.

How many of you who are so hell-bent to throw out the "illegals" have hired lawnpersons who may or may not have their papers? Or the sub-hiring that they do...many of the sub-hires don't have their papers. Yet, admit it that you turn your head to that b/c their services benefit YOU.

And, how about those interesting taquerias that we know have the best food? Shall we question and check their papers to see if the cooks, waitpersons and cashiers are all legal? You anti-immigrant folks would be so funny if not for your message of hate being so dangerous.

Carlos Ponce

sverige, let us clarify. The term "mojado" is slang referring to those who have crossed illegally into this country. If you were to cross into Mexico without the proper papers they would throw you in prison. If you were born in the USA that makes you a "jus soli" American, native born. So none of your "Todos somos mojados". Native born people can cut grass and cook just as well as those from across the border. And what's with this "You anti-immigrant folks"? No one is anti-immigrant. We're against illegal immigration. What's so difficult about doing it LEGALLY. MY PARENTS DID! MY GRANDPARENTS DID! IT IS NOT HATE. MY PARENTS AND GRANDPARENTS OBEYED THE LAW!

kevjlang
Kevin Lang

My understanding is that it's much more difficult to move here and obtain a work permit than it used to be. Especially the work permit.

Carlos Ponce

Not really, kevjlang. I have cousins, primos and primas, who have done precisely that by just following the rules, obeying the law and with no help from relatives. The paperwork starts at the American Consulate.

kevjlang
Kevin Lang

Is that just to come here to reside, or to come here and work? My understanding is that the H-1 Visas are in short supply and high demand. Your chances of winning the lottery are almost better than your chances of getting an H-1 Visa if you're from Mexico and quite a few other countries. And, that's if an employer is willing to file all the paperwork that justifies his claims that he needs you. The Work Visa program is a key part of most of the Immigration Reforms that Congress has talked about.

Carlos Ponce

My cousins came over as permanent residents, eventually to become American citizens. They have already applied and they have nice jobs. I compare that to the questionable status of the parents of the students I have had in the past. They and their children are saving to go back across the border. The money they make here goes a long way south of the border. They look at their stay here as a "get rich quick" scheme. In the mean time the kids could care less about the school's ADA or about Standardized Test scores. They want to make money. Some do care but too many don't. So much for the "dream".

Chris Gimenez

Do you have anything to back up all that "understanding" you have about visas for legal immigrants?

kevjlang
Kevin Lang

It's hearsay. Which is why I'm asking questions. Since when is trying to get a better understanding a bad thing to do? Perhaps you could do with gaining understanding rather than making all these assertions you make.

Do you have something to add to this conversation, or do you like making useless snide remarks?

Jim Forsythe

New H-1B visas won't be available until next fiscal year, and you should plan on having your prospective employer file the application on April 1 in order to be included in the lottery. The basic requirement of the H-1B is that the employer (an in most cases the industry as a whole) requires at least a bachelor's degree in the field for the position, and that you hold the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree in the specialized field. The H-1B regulations do not require experience in addition to the bachelor's degree.

This is for H-1B visas

Jim Forsythe

Just found this
Specialty Occupations
"The H1/H1B visa is intended to bring in people into specialized occupations. If you are not attempting to fill a specialty occupation, then the employer must petition with the H2/H2B visa application."
Read more : http://www.ehow.com/facts_6054592_h_1-visa_.html
It also list a lot of other types of visa's

Chris Gimenez

Well Lang, just what assertions have I made that I haven't backed up? You're the one-by your own admission-that's spouting hearsay and calling it "your understanding". So now me asking you a question that embarrassed you is making snide remarks?

As for H1B visas, the question is whether we actually need those individuals or will those immigrants just work for less in the highly educated fields?

Our problem now is not the legal immigrants-it's the hundreds of thousands illegal aliens swarming across our border with unfettered access. Those uneducated masses are not going to better our country, but of course that's not the point of allowing them to come here. It's to overload our systems so the boy president can enact his fundamental change of this country.

kevjlang
Kevin Lang

When people talk to me, I listen to what they say. Through listening, there is understanding. The more people you listen to, the more understanding you gain. Sometimes the understanding is based on purely factual information, sometimes anecdotal, sometimes false, sometimes with bad intent. All leads to different degrees of understanding. Understanding does not necessarily imply knowledge. If I have some understanding, but not complete knowledge, I ask more questions. I'm sorry that you don't like people asking questions, least of all, asking them of SOMEONE ELSE.

Get over yourself. You couldn't possibly embarrass me. If you weren't so full of yourself, maybe you could embarrass yourself.

One thing I KNOW is that, regardless of the foreign nation you're from, you cannot just knock on the door and ask if you can come over and work, and immediately get a document permitting it. I understand there are some hoops to jump through. However, I don't have an understanding of how many or how arduous. If you happen to have answers, I'm more than happy to read them. However, if you want to just pipe in and call people idiots for asking questions, then I'd have to ask you when you last looked in the mirror.

Chris Gimenez

And just exactly when did I call you an idiot? My question to you is the same and you don't seem to be able to answer. You claim I've made assertions that I can't back up. Name one.

JBG JBG

Half of Houston is illegal, but most are good people and afraid they will be deported! My girlfriend married an illegal! Broke my heart!!!! "Muchacha Bonita!!!!"
-
She regretted it though! I met her on the police force. She made a big mistake is all I know, because JBG the Smacktalker was ( is ) the BOMB, and was one of the best officers in South East Houston! ( El Senor ). Those were the days!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Steve Fouga

First, JBG, is there anything you haven't done or been? [thumbup]

Second, the USG determines and controls its legal immigrants with an eye towards shaping our population and workforce. The USG is targeting Asia for its legal immigrants. (Sorry, no link... I remember reading this awhile back. If someone wants to refute it, go ahead.)

Third, what if we could decide we were were okay having the the people who are streaming across our border as our friends? Some of them are my friends. They are admirable human beings; good people. I would be one of them if I lived in Ecuador or Mexico, wanted a better life, and had the cajones to pursue it.

Anyway, what would we do if we could decide that? How would we write legislation to accommodate that? Because that's what we have -- friends, co-workers, employees, maybe even bosses who are illegal. The greatest nation in the world has a bunch of illegal aliens, and it's working pretty good. We could probably make it work really good with some imagination.

Chris Gimenez

Wow Buckner, you must subscribe to the theory that if it hasn't broken down into complete chaos yet then it must be "working pretty good".

" The greatest nation in the world has a bunch of illegal aliens, and it's working pretty good"

Perhaps you should open your eyes and read a little about what's going on and the terrible consequences being wrought on this country and our Border Patrol officers by a boy president who has unilaterally voided our immigration laws. I understand you may not want to expend too much energy proving how wrong your are so I'll help you a bit.

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/06/24/Murder-Suspects-Sex-Offenders-and-MS-13-gangster

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/06/25/Swine-Flu-Confirmed-at-Shelter-for-Unaccompanied-Minors

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/06/25/ICE-Removal-Operations-Director-Will-Be-Years-Before-Unaccompanied-Minors-Have-Cases-Heard

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/06/25/Goodlatte-Obama-fiddles-while-our-borders-implode

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/06/24/Border-Patrol-Union-President-No-one-is-afraid-of-breaking-the-law

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/381101/texas-immigration-center-magnet-disease-ryan-lovelace

And we'll follow this story to see if Miguel turns out to be one of your illegal "friends" and "good people".

http://houston.cbslocal.com/2014/06/25/park-ranger-beaten-after-interrupting-assault/

Carlos Ponce

"The greatest nation in the world has a bunch of illegal aliens, and it's working pretty good."-Jake Buckner
Jake, I didn't know your middle name was "Pollyanna". Just this morning on KTRH we learned of the many diseases the THOUSANDS of children from Central America bring with them, swine flu is included in the mix. Ready for a pandemic? And even though Border Agents are inundated with the thousands of children they have managed to nab some murderers, gang members, drug pushers, sex predators among the chaos within one week.
http://www.ktrh.com/articles/houston-news-121300/violent-criminals-crossing-into-texas-12504213
All the while the Obama administration pleads the Shultz defense "I know nothing", despite advertising for escorts for 65,000 children back in JANUARY.

Steve Fouga

Yes, they bring crime, disease, disruption to our education and medical care systems, blight to our neighborhoods, etc. I can't stand the idea of illegal immigration. I hate it. But it's what we have, and have had for decades. It ebbs and flows. Right now its the worst it's ever been, because we've proven we can't enforce or don't have the will to enforce our immigration laws.

Now guys, tell me an idea that would have a practical chance of working. Tell me a way to stop it, as well as manage those already here, that wouldn't violate our own laws. We could shoot 'em, and that might stop it, but maybe not, because being shot is part of the conditions some of these people are fleeing from. What would you do with those already here? How would you find them? What sort of process would you apply that could be applied equitably and non-discriminatorially, and not turn the country into a police state? Where would the money for such a program come from? Carlos, bvresident, can either of you claim to have seen an immigration reform bill you truly think would work?

Chris Gimenez

Jake, there's no "we" in the refusal to enforce our border laws. It's the boy president and his Entitlement Party. The GOP House has passed five immigration bills but the EP and the bp insist on a package deal knowing they will violate it with reckless abandon.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/key-chairman-blames-obamas-lack-enforcement-killing-immigration-reform_795736.html

Chris Gimenez

Here's another example of Jake Buckner's "good people" and how things "are working pretty good" with all these illegal aliens.

http://www.chron.com/news/texas/article/2-indicted-over-body-found-in-Houston-area-forest-5581393.php

It's important to note that our boy president has recently stated that these people are the future of our country. I tend to think they should be the future of some other country.

Steve Fouga

For every story of baaaad illegal immigrants, I could find a thousand about baaaad U.S. citizens. And if I looked hard enough, a thousand about good illegal immigrants.

Griping about our president won't solve the immigration problem. I'd say you should have voted him out, but that wouldn't have solved it either.

What will solve it? I'm waiting to hear your ideas -- ones you know will work. Ideas that Congress can agree on. Those are the only ones that count.

"I tend to think they should be the future of some other country." LOL! I agree, bvresident, but they're already here. Now what? Practical ideas, please.

Chris Gimenez

First, seal the border by any means necessary up to and including the use of military assets. Once that's done then the ones that are currently here illegally can be addressed. The reason there is no immigration reform is because the boy president doesn't want it. He wants an unlimited influx of illegals without regard for what they are bringing here whether it's babies, or drugs, or gang members, or terrorists. What most in the GOP have realized is that this boy president is a massive liar who can't be trusted to do what he says he will do or what any law says. Until the border is sealed and there are no more coming into this country illegally there can be no permanent solution.

Jim Forsythe

Something else to add . before border can be sealed.
"Federal judge who’s ruled that the congressionally-approved project may have a “disparate impact on lower-income minority communities.”
The "disparate impact on lower-income minority communities” actually refers to property owners whose land is taken/bought by CPB for the border fence. It does not refer to the impact of the wall in keeping Mexicans out.
"The plaintiff claims that the public interest is “significant” because it will “help the public
understand the actual dimensions and location of the wall” as well as “allow the public to
analyze whether the government was treating property owners equally and fairly” or whether
CBP built the wall in such a way that it disadvantaged “minority property owners.”
The case involves the plaintiff wanting FOIA access to emails between the CBP and property owners. In some aspects the judge sides with the plaintiff and in others with the CBP.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-cont...nceopinion.pdf
Read more: http://www.city-data.com/forum/illegal-immigration/2144910-obama-judge-rules-border-fence-racist.html#ixzz35lyBoR32"

Chris Gimenez

We can't wait and shouldn't wait on a fence. Put the military on the border and let them go to work. Just like solving any other serious problem the first step is to stop the bleeding and then apply the cure.

Chris Gimenez

Jake, so are these 90% of illegal aliens who won't show up for their court hearings the "thousands of good ones" you're referring to?

http://washingtonexaminer.com/report-90-of-illegals-skip-immigration-court-appearances-135000-will-go-missing/article/2550217

At least the Border Patrol is doing less dangerous immigration work now.

http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/border-agents-new-jobs-shower-runs-food-prep-laundry-service/

sverige1
Lars Faltskog

Response to Jake Buckner posted at 11:38 am on Thu, Jun 26, 2014:

The majority of the immigrants in the past couple of decades (whether illegal or not) have have positive contributory factors. It's so many of our multi-generational citizenry who have learned to NOT work. Our recent immigrants are some of the hardest working folks around. Like it or not, bvresident...our immigrants are OUR future. Learn to love not unlove.

Chris Gimenez

The best thing that can happen is to ship all these criminals to NJ, NY, California, Maine, and every other blue state and let them be bankrupted by their bizarre idea of allowing this mass migration of criminality.

Steve Fouga

"First, seal the border by any means necessary up to and including the use of military assets."

Come on, guys! If this were practical, it would have been done already! Geez, the military sizes its forces to protect the homeland (against actual invasion), project power, deter aggression through forward presence, provide peacekeeping forces, fight regional wars, and maybe a few other things.

The point is this: Doing anything else is extra -- like sealing the border. There is NO money for it. What would you have them cancel to seal the border?

A question: When the illegals pour over the border, do you order the military, the National Guard, the Border Patrol, the local LEOs to kill them? Because the situation they're fleeing includes death as a very real possibility. That, or a life worse than death. They have little to lose.

Carlos Ponce

The purpose of the Armed Forces is to protect the borders of the United States. If we would simply put them in training on the border you would see illegal immigration curbed if not stopped. The extra cost is -nothing. They have to train anyway. There is already money allocated for that. Rules of engagement: If fired upon, return fire. If not, round them up and turn them over to the border patrol for deportation. Since the Mexican Army already implants their own troops with GPS I would not be against doing the same for illegals "caught" and released to their side of the border. Since it is used only to track their movements on this side it would not be the "Mark of the Beast".

sverige1
Lars Faltskog

Response to bvresident posted at 8:22 pm on Wed, Jun 25, 2014:

"The uneducated masses aren't going to better this country???"

It's our job as a country of immigrants to help perpetuate our land of opportunity. If we had this kind of attitude in the 1700s, then no one then would be deserving to settle in this country. Good thing such mentality wasn't permeating when yours and my ancestors were trying to navigate through Ellis Island.

Let's do the proverbial "put ourselves in their shoes" line of thinking. If you had the opportunity to find something to do across the border and you knew you could possibly pull it off leaping across, you would most likely do so. Then, you'd obtain the job(s), send some money "envio to Mexico" so that your loved ones there could survive. I doubt if folks want to come up here to the States on a whim. After all, we have colder winters and a "strange" language to contend with...in their eyes [shoes].

kevjlang
Kevin Lang

bvresident, you asked a good question about the necessity of H1B visas.

My observations are that there are elements of both in there. It does help to manage the size of the labor pool, but it can also help regulate the cost of it, too. Both of these can be positive or detrimental. A properly working immigration system coordinated with a properly working labor department can help keep the pendulum from going out of control.

You stated that the legal immigrants aren't a problem. I would argue that they are. In many cases, our systems cannot process legal immigrants fast enough. They also don't do a good job at managing them once they're here. For example, as I recall, all of the 9/11 hijackers arrived here legally, but few of them were still here legally, as they either no longer met the criteria for student visas, or had failed to renew their visas, or failed to leave when they had expired.

But, I agree the illegals are a bigger problem. We don't have health or criminal information on them, we don't really know what they're doing here, whether the work they're doing is work that they uniquely can perform, or if they're performing the jobs because the employers know they can violate minimum wage laws, occupational security standards, or various other standards. Now, in these cases, the illegal immigrants are being abused--they aren't getting paid what the positions would normally be worth, and/or the employer is avoiding the costs of safety equipment and other costs that would be standard with legal workers. The flip side is that these companies are able to operate at lower costs than companies that only hire legal workers. These cheating employers, however, are delivering products to us at prices far less than they otherwise would, and those "benefits" cannot be ignored when trying to balance the equation.

And then there are the ones that are here solely to break our laws.

However, if the intent of the situation is to clog things up so that our president can enact his fundamental change, I'd have to ask which president you're talking about, as there have been quite a few that have been on watch while this has been a recognized problem.

In the grand scheme of things, I would say that this problem, however, is much smaller than many of our other problems, such as our debt, deficit, Middle East relations, energy security, the economy. So, if this is paralyzing our systems and our government, then I'd hate to think what all the other problems are doing. I don't see why ANY of these issues would paralyze us. Even all piled up. If they are paralyzing us, then I'd wonder how we got this far, and I'd wonder if there's any chance of us ever going anywhere again. If this is paralyzing us, it's because we've chosen to be paralyzed. I don't recall making that choice.

Recognizing problems is one thing. Hysterical over-exaggerations is another. I'd rather skip the panic attacks and sit down and discuss steps toward a solution. It doesn't have to be the full solution, but partial solutions that take a bite out of the problem, and mitigate adverse side effects is fine. It may not get us back to the 1950's, but if it gets us a little closer to where we need to be, it's a good place to start.

Steve Fouga

Response to Carlos:

"The purpose of the Armed Forces is to protect the borders of the United States."

I take your point, but I think they would say their purpose is to execute the National Military Strategy. Protecting the borders is definitely the type of thing they could do, but I doubt the specifics of immigration control is within current doctrine -- usually they would be expected to protect against armed invasion. And the use of regular military on U.S. soil is strictly regulated as a way of protecting our freedoms.

So I believe (but can no longer say for sure) that your idea of using the military to control the border would require a change to strategy. The next opportunity to do this is 2016, unless it was just done in this year's NMS issuance. It's worth thinking about and planning for -- in fact I'd be surprised if such a plan does NOT exist.

I agree with you that training on the border would be a deterrent, but I can guarantee the military is not set up to train that way. For one thing, much of the land along the border is private property. The military trains on Government property for good reasons. Plus, there would be a large cost associated with placing enough troops in training on the border to be an effective deterrent. It's a long border.

Still, definitely worth considering, and I bet it's being considered.
[thumbup]

Chris Gimenez

For Jake and Lang and the rest who believe the dems are trying to reform immigration. The fact is that they want to bring in these criminal masses and put them on our entitlement programs hoping they will vote democrat for the rest of their lives.

http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2014/06/26/dems-block-gop-bills-to-verify-status-block-tax-credits-to-illegal-immigrants/

Meanwhile, the dems know that the IRS is illegally paying more than $4 BILLION a year in tax benefits to illegal aliens who don't deserve them. So these "good people" are filing illegally and taking our money illegally but we should continue to treat them as if they're just poor folks looking for a better life. They're criminals when they come here illegally and they remain criminals until they're gone.

kevjlang
Kevin Lang

Incredible. I mean lack of credibility. Let me know when you want me to be responsible for something I actually wrote, rather than for the words that magically appear in your head.

Fact is that Congress, for at least 4 decades has paid lip service to the issue, then proceeded to more pressing matters, such as their next vacation.

Just out of curiosity, why didn't the 108th or 109th Congress solve this problem?

Chris Gimenez

The dems don't want it "solved". They want a law that they know full well the boy president will cherry pick which parts he wants to follow just like he did with the (U)ACA. Did you happen to read the link I posted? It might shed some light on why nothing's being done and which side is holding it up.

There has been no President in the last four decades that has opened the flood gates like the boy president has. Nothing even close.

kevjlang
Kevin Lang

Hmmm. Evidently this was a big enough problem that the 109th Congress passed the Border Fence. While they were at it, why didn't they fix the rest of the problem? If conservatives have the answer to the problem, why didn't they answer it then, when the liberals were outnumbered? Could it be that the conservatives also have ulterior motives for not fixing it?

Chris Gimenez

Well Lang, are you seeing the free-for-all we're currently seeing under your boy president is the same level of illegal immigration that was occurring 8 years ago? I don't think so. They certainly didn't get much accomplished but what the boy wonder is doing now on his own is beyond the pale. BTW, I thought you weren't looking backwards?

kevjlang
Kevin Lang

Well, you say that the conservatives, if we'll let them take control, will fix it. However, when I look for a record of that, I can't find it. Until I see the conservatives PROVE they have the will to fix it, all I hear is wind rustling through the trees.

Back in 2006, the problem was so bad, we had to allocate BILLIONS of dollars we didn't have to start building the fence. Billions of dollars later, and what has the fence done, if you say the problem is even worse now?

The political will to scream that the sky is falling is clearly there. I've been hearing that for decades.

When I witness one session of Congress go by where their attention span on any issue actually extends beyond their next vacation, then I'll start thinking that maybe they're willing to actually work on solving things. Until then, I'm resolute in my opinion that NEITHER party really has the intestinal fortitude to really dive in to the quagmire and fix it. For me, any other opinion is disconnected from reality. The fact is that any legitimate Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill is going to tick the heck out of constituents that the incumbents depend on to get re-elected. That's why everyone bailed on the bipartisan bill the Senate almost pulled together.

Carlos Ponce

kevjlang, that's the problem. If we elect CONSERVATIVES, the problem will be solved. Neither Bush was a true Conservative. Neither was Mitt, nor John McCain. John Cronyn claims he is one but fought Ted Cruz on Conservative principles. Now old school Republicans use questionable tactics to beat Conservatives. Chris Christie is too Liberal for my tastes but I will reluctantly vote for him over an extreme Leftist.
As for the border it must be secured. I'm afraid some terrorists have slipped in during this "refugee children's stampede". Forget about Immigration Reform for now. Ask any Border Patrol agent, we should enforce the current laws the best we can.

Steve Fouga

Carlos -- Then name a true conservative who has ever been elected president. By your definition I think the answer is none. The reason is that a person of the type you want to see elected is viewed as poison by much of the populace.

I'm not saying that you're wrong and nearly everyone else is right, but you can see it doesn't bode well for the type reform you're seeking. That's why I'm suggesting a better path is to find a way to legally accommodate the illegals. (BTW, I don't even know what that means exactly, I admit it. But denying them entry hasn't worked -- EVER.)

Carlos Ponce

[A] true conservative who has ever been elected president -Calvin Coolidge. He and Harding took the worst economy ever inherited and led the United States into a time of economic prosperity - The Roaring Twenties. Too bad Herbert Hoover who was a cabinet member didn't take better notes. We could have avoided the Depression.
Ronald Reagan comes very close but made deals with Tip O'Neil which drove up the deficit.

kevjlang
Kevin Lang

carlosrponce, the 109th Congress felt that the best way to enforce the current laws was a border fence. Evidently, today's House must still feel the same, since they haven't been out trying to drive home any bills to change the course.

You knock liberals for making excuses for Obama and today's Senate, yet, in 2006, we had a combination of House, Senate, and White House that were collectively as conservative as we're likely to have for awhile, and still nothing was done to really address the root of the problem. Nearly 13 years after 9/11 and our DHS still isn't very good at even managing the expirations of visas of people that come here legally, and isn't that the category of people that actually terrorized us? If we can't even enforce THAT part of the law effectively, what gives you confidence that we have the means and gumption to enforce the illegal entry issues?

I'm sure that if all of our legislators and economic systems were to get together to truly solve this, we could. However, without that combined commitment, screaming about it may be the most that's going to happen.

I do agree that we trying to come up with a comprehensive, all-encompassing, single-shot solution is probably not what we should be working on. Even a few things that try to nip away at some of the bigger issues would a better way to start. However, in today's socio-economic-political environment, I don't like the chances of even the most token of attempts to get much life.

Carlos Ponce

The 109th Congress had 55 Republicans, 44 Democrats, i Independent in the Senate. It had from a high of 232 Republicans to 229 in the House and 201 to 202 Democrats. A simple Majority for Republicans in each. However to end debate on a bill the Senate required 60 votes. That the rule until Harry Reid changed Senate Rules and invoked the "Nuclear Option".

kevjlang
Kevin Lang

In other words, if the Democrats did nothing in a similar scenario, it's excuses, but during a Republican majority, it's reasons. I totally understand. Somehow they were able to get the fence to a vote, but somehow unable to get anything to a vote improve the accounting of legal visas, nor dealing with illegal immigrants that fall into the laps of law enforcement?

I'm sure there were lots of reasons the 109th Congress did almost nothing to fix the problem. I don't think it had anything to do with the lack of a "ram it home" majority in the Senate. What you're saying is that if there's any chance that the conservatives might have to negotiate anything with anyone, there's no chance of passing anything. That sounds like a request for totalitarian rule, which is a terrible idea, no matter which faction gets totality.

Lisa Blair

The majority of adults and children are coming here from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. They should be considered refugees because they are "forced to leave under the threat of persecution, war or violence. They cannot safely return to their country." It's not just a legal issue it's a humanitarian one.

Chris Gimenez

They are not forced to leave and that's a b.s. excuse. They leave of their volition because their countries suck and that's not our problem. They come here uneducated and unable to do anything other than the most menial of labor, many of them are criminal gang members looking to expand their opportunities, and they take more than they give to our society. It's simply not our humanitarian issue and it amazes me how often the Left will spew their hatred for this country using our military to end human suffering in those countries under brutal dictators but they have no problem overloading our country with their problems by allowing these hordes of illegal aliens to overwhelm us.

This is the reality of what's happening.

http://www.krgv.com/news/brooks-county-ranchers-worry-about-criminal-immigrants/

Carlos Ponce

lisablair, this is what the children are told to say when the reach the United States. Fact is that the Obama administration has known of their coming since January.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/government-advertised-in-january-for-escorts-for-65000-illegal-alien-children-to-be-resettled?f=must_reads
Flyers are circulated in Central America stating that the borders are now "open".
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/06/04/someone-is-telling-people-in-central-american-countries-that-now-is-a-great-time-to-sneak-into-the-united-states/
Let's say that some are refugees. How many can you house since you are such a caring person? Or does your humanitarianism end where your pocketbook begins? And why stop at refugees from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador? There are millions who would like to come here world-wide. We're flat broke, We owe BILLIONS. Obama's policies are driving that number HIGHER. Sorry, lisablair, we can't afford it! Take a number.

Lisa Blair

You two obviously don't know much about what's going on in Central America. It is not a safe place for anyone right now. For every right-wing link you post there are other sources that contradict yours. You are factually wrong about most of what you've posted. Don't question my humanitarianism, you don't know anything about me.

Carlos Ponce

Factually wrong? Yet I provide links and that first one has a GOVERNMENT link on it. And you provide????????? So where am I wrong?
All I know about you is what you write. In what you write your "humanitarianism" is self-evident.

Chris Gimenez

lisablair, I'm not questioning your humanitarianism but why don't you prove it with your money, your efforts in THEIR country rather mine, and with your family's safety rather than mine? And while you're at it, why don't you post some of those links you say contradict what we've posted here? Of course it won't happen because you people are all talk when it comes to actually proving anything-such as your "humanitarianism". Talk is cheap sweetie.

Jim Forsythe

Lisablair
It's great that You don't think of not just Yourself.I have a few questions.
If we let the kids in where are they going to stay.
How are we going to pay for thier care and the iincrease in med. care, schools, increase on water plants, roads and such.We canot pay for they whole world, or solve all problems.
It great that You want to help , but have You donated money for the kids . Are the countries they are crossing to get here taking care of any of them? If not why not.
Lisablair
Please give the plan You have to help the kids.

Lisa Blair

The children move within 72 hours from Border Patrol custody to shelter programs run by HHS. Most of them have a family member already living in the US who sponsors them. Under DACA they are allowed to live with their sponsor while their cases are adjudicated. If they are deemed by the court to warrant asylum they may be allowed to stay. If not they are deported. Children coming here from Mexico are sent back immediately because of our contiguous border. With the Central American children it is often difficult to find family and the US doesn't have the same agreements with those countries that we have with Mexico. Yes, I have donated time, money and hundreds of hours of volunteer time towards the welfare of both domestic and international children .

Jim Forsythe

Lisablair
What about all the kids that we hear about on news that are here by themselves. Will they be placed in homes like Yours or stay in the Jail play yards.

Chris Gimenez

"Most of them have a family member already living in the US who sponsors them."

How do those who are here illegally sponsor their family who comes here illegally?
You're making stuff up sweetheart.

" Under DACA they are allowed to live with their sponsor while their cases are adjudicated"

You mean like this?

http://washingtonexaminer.com/report-90-of-illegals-skip-immigration-court-appearances-135000-will-go-missing/article/2550217

Or this?

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/us-looking-all-options-immigration-surge

You statements are full of holes.

Steve Fouga

Personally I don't like the posting of links within a blog that discusses political issues. If I see one from an obviously conservative or liberal "news" source I ignore it out of hand.

I'm much more interested in posters' personal views than what they can dig up from biased websites. Those of you who can think for yourselves offer interesting and thoughtful insights. The rest of you...
[whistling]

Chris Gimenez

Personal views are fine Jake. But when personal views are backed up by the facts they're even better. I understand why some on this forum don't like the links-it's because there are no links refuting the facts being posted and that's disconcerting to the Left when they want their false message to be believed.

Steve Fouga

Well, bv, I wish I could tell the facts from the spin.

Chris Gimenez

It's kind of cool how you and Lang tag-team the truth. Lang says my assertions aren't backed up and you say you don't want to see anything backed up because it's only opinions that matter to you. Very bizarre.

kevjlang
Kevin Lang

The only assertions that I've claimed aren't backed up are the ones you pull out of your back end and then say they're my statements. I'm more than willing to state my own opinions and respond to challenges, just as I've generally witnessed you do with your opinions. Heck, I don't even mind if you just construct a strawman and start flaming away. But, when you give that strawman my name and claim it's me when it bears no resemblance, I'm going to push back. If you want to argue against my opinions, don't worry, I'm happy to give you plenty of targets. But, when it comes to my opinions, I'm not outsourcing them to anyone, not even you.

Steve Fouga

LOL! Well, that's how it is on forums. We don't all like the same thing. I have no idea who Lang is, but I usually enjoy his posts. We definitely don't collude, I can guarantee that!

Notice I said I don't like links for POLITICAL issues. That's because so many are biased. Both ways. I acknowledge that several of you are MUCH better read on political issues than I am -- a treasure trove of conservative or liberal hogwash. It isn't that I don't want to see anything backed up, it's that I don't believe everything you use as proof. Factual links are fine, but it's hard to discern which are which, so I tend to skip all of them.

Carlos Ponce

A person's thoughts are great but some people like to play games with facts. I have noticed that those on the Left give Huffington Post, Salon, CNN, NPR, Newsweek, and other highly biased "news services" as their source. I too will use a Leftist source if it will prove my point. It would be too easy to give FOX news, Rush Limbaugh, etc as a source but I know most on the Left would reject them. Rush has his "stacks of stuff' from all over the political spectrum. I prefer to pick factual data bases when possible. For example, one of the GDN posters always cries out about Reagan's treatment of AIDS in his administration. For him I use a dot gov source for information. Someone else always gives misinformation about GW Bush and the "Mission Accomplished" Banner. Although I don't like using the wikipedia web source I used it here. I also used this web source to point out the large number of Northern European Countries who have no minimum wage. It was not the best but quick and easy.

Steve Fouga

"A person's thoughts are great but some people like to play games with facts."

Hahahahahahaha! You nailed it, Carlos! That's why I like thoughts!

Lisa Blair

I assure you I'm not making stuff and I'm not your sweetheart or sweetie.

Carlos Ponce

And I thought be was just treating you with kindness. I guess some don't appreciate chivalry.
definition: The qualities idealized by knighthood, such as bravery, courtesy, honor, and gallantry toward women.
" Hoo Ooh, yeah, baby Whoa, mmm Now I'm the kinda guy who don't believe That chivalry is dead, no..."
Read more: Temptations - Treat Her Like A Lady Lyrics | MetroLyrics

sverige1
Lars Faltskog

Response to Jake Buckner posted at 3:31 pm on Fri, Jun 27, 2014:

I lean toward the reading of opinions over links also. As Alvin Van Black preferred years ago on his talkshow (the one my great-grandmother listen to) - He told the callers to please express their own opinions and not cite countless articles. He also didn't care for folks reading "quotes" over the radio.

That guy had the best talk show in town.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.