« Twelfth Imam update | Main | Eric Cantor for Vice President »

September 24, 2011

Comments

Only proles are serious about immigration reform, since they are the ones affected most. Elites (like Romney) that talk about immigration will inevitably break their promises because they don't actually agree that immigration should be reduced.

Please explain Obama's record to me, then. That statement that he has directed INS not to deport anyone seems either flat wrong or seriously incomplete.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/22/deportations-obama-immigration_n_906676.html

My understanding is a lot of liberals are pissed off at him because his administration actually takes immigration enforcement somewhat seriously.

Also the risk of even very liberal judges overriding congress on immigration is pretty low. I think that's one of the areas of maximum deference. Unless the immigration law is something like, "Whites only," it'll uphold. Federal law, that is; state law is anyone's guess.

Bachmann criticized the 1965 immigration act.

http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/09/who-is-michelle.html

She also has a B- rating from NumbersUSA.

http://www.vdare.com/articles/could-michele-bachmann-be-the-patriotic-immigration-reform-candidate-maybe

By the standards of today's politicians, that's amazing. Yes Romney would be way better than Obama. If he wins the primary, I'm voting for him. I still think our best bet for reduced legal immigration comes from Bachmann.

Romney also is in favor of more H1Bs. Which is bad.

Bachmann is more hawkish in rhetoric, but she has very little tangible record on immigration. Romney on the other hand, vetoed the Dream Act in Massachusetts and managed to deputize the state police to go after employers who hire illegal immigrants. My sense is that while Romney is part of the establishment, being tough on immigration will not hurt his financial base. Most of the businesses that are absolutely opposed to any crackdown on illegal immigration are agricultural and construction interests, who support Perry. Romney's record isn't as good as some conservatives would like it to be simply because his stance on this issue is clouded by other issues that he's perceived as "liberal" on. I'd put it this way using a credit analogy: Romney bought a $500 laptop on this issue with a credit card and paid it off. Rick Perry bought a house and had it foreclosed. He is by far the worst of the "electable" Republican candidates on this issue.

Bachmann, like Paul and Cain, is against birthright citizenship.

Well, Bachmann made said, “the immigration system in the United States worked very well up until the mid-1960’s, when liberal members of Congress changed the immigration laws.” Romney is mindful of beating Obama, so he has always said legal immigration—good; illegal immigration—bad, and he will likely pick Rubio, who is Hispanic. However, the fact that he would choose immigration to be his main conservative cause, rather than creationism, global warming denial, or health care inertia proves that he is a smart and electable conservative. He also confronted McCain by saying that he would not support someone like Sandra Day O’Connor. What Bachmann says is irrelevant because she would never be elected president and would only be the nominee in Obama’s wildest fantasies. The only questions left for the primary are: Did conservatives pay attention to the debates and ditch Perry? and Is Christie willing to take a big risk and go against SuperRomney?

See: Numbers USA 2012 Presidential Hopefuls' Immigration Stances

"For example, he has directed INS to not deport any illegal aliens unless they have committed serious crimes."

Link?

It is not clear that Obama can be defeated in 2012, although it now seems likely. But stuff happens.

However, even with Obama gone, much of his agenda, including Obamacare and various EPA and DOJ actions, will remain. Overturning them would require a Republican majority in the Senate large enough to impose cloture. This is nominally 60 votes, but the Party has enough Rinos that a majority close to 70 would likely be needed.

In this regard, it should be noted that the House, with a large Republican majority, could not overturn the incandescent lightbulb ban, and it never came close to actual budget cuts.

The American people want Socialism, but they want it under another name. The Republicans will give it to them.

I can't spool up the interest to parse the difference between Romney and Bachmann.

It boggles me that so many possible allies have been co-opted on illegal immigration. Where are the labor unions? Illegals are no more than scab labor. Where is the anti-growth Left, the ones successfully holding up transshipment of oil sand machinery to Canada? Where are the environmentalists? The Blacks? Whenever I confront one of these seeming allies, I get a blank look and some banal cliches about "freedom" or "work". It's creepy.

Well, combine Socialism with immigration reform. Outsocialist Obama, but with closed borders. Geert Wilders is not just opposed to immigration, but somewhat Socialist, too.

Over at VFR they're all excited about Perry being "finished" because of his stand on immigration.

If Romney is better than Perry on immigration, I'm not seeing it.

"opposed to any crackdown on illegal immigration are agricultural and construction interests,"

Southern blacks used to do a lot of the migrant ag work way back in the 30s and 40s - were they ever heavily represented in construction? Are they really capable of it now? I'm seriously wondering if black yout and our kids as a whole can even keep up, from what I see around me and what I hear from contractors. I mean, drug use, chronic tardiness, quitting after one day etc.

The black work ethic has been pretty much ruined by the availability of welfare and affirmative action. It's too bad because, while most blacks can't really do the types of jobs they've gotten through affirmative action, they are perfectly capable of doing the types of jobs illegal immigrants typically do. With the ever increasing government deficits, welfare cutbacks will eventually come. When they do, blacks will be more willing to do those jobs and will be more likely to join the anti-immigration coalition to keep out competitors for those jobs.

Carol, one of our current mysteries is why black men are so little seen in construction. For example, since 1995 U.C. Berkeley has been renovating bldgs. or erecting new ones almost continuously, and I've been there the whole time to see it. Despite the fact that this activity involves substantial federal funding, conditioned on meeting federal "diversity" hiring standards, you see exceedingly few blacks in the crews. It's as if there's some kind of tacit acknowledgement that blacks are simply not good workers, and that brown faces will do for diversity.

"I'm seriously wondering if black youth and our kids as a whole can even keep up, from what I see around me and what I hear from contractors. I mean, drug use, chronic tardiness, quitting after one day etc." - carol


Welcome to my generation. If success is about standing out and not fitting in then shining bright today has never been easier. The problem with Millennials is that perhaps unlike any generation before them they were isolated from reality in a bubble of youth culture called “adolescence”. Parents from earlier eras of human history would be horrified at how kids are brought up today. Being kept sheltered from the adult world until 18 (could be even up to 22 -24 if you include college) is the root cause of the problem.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200703/trashing-teens

"If Romney is better than Perry on immigration, I'm not seeing it."

Perry - supported tuition benefits for illegal aliens. Romney - opposed it.

enough for you?

Secret of Nam asked to see a link confirming Obama "directed INS to not deport any illegal aliens unless they have committed serious crimes."

Here it is. Of course, this article is about Big Sis and doesn't really mention BO. But Big Sis works for BO. It's BO's policy.

www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/08/30/napolitano-says-shes-deporting-enough-illegal-immigrants-

This post was about Bachmann vs Romney on immigration. All I can say is that NumbersUSA gave Bachmann a B- and Romney a C-. Not that bad compared to what others got. This chart breaks down what they've either said or done regarding the various issues surrounding immigration.

www.numbersusa.com/content/action/2012-presidential-hopefuls-immigration-stances.html

I don't know that either of them would actually "champion" the issue once they're in office. Nor do I know which one would actually be more effective at getting it done. But I figure either of them would enforce the laws and sign restriction legislation presented by congress. So the two key factors include a congress willing to push the issue and a passively supportive president willing to back it. I also figure that state and local governments can get an awful lot done just by making e-verify mandatory and going after businesses who cheat. No jobs means no illegals.

"Perry - supported tuition benefits for illegal aliens. Romney - opposed it.

enough for you?"

Nah. Of all the issues surrounding immigration, allowing illegals to pay in-state tuition is the *least* important.

Romney has said nothing about reducing the overall level of immigration, ending chain migration, ending the visa lottery, ending refugee fraud, or ending birthright citizenship.

Both Romney and Perry advocate punishing businesses that knowingly violate immigration laws.

Between 'em, still pretty much a wash.

Texas law grants in-state tuition to:

"a person who:(A) graduated from a public or private high school in this state or received the equivalent of a high school diploma in this state; and (B) maintained a residence continuously in this state for: (i) the three years preceding the date of graduation or receipt of the diploma equivalent, as applicable; and (ii) the year preceding the census date of the academic term in which the person is enrolled in an institution of higher education."

Seems fair enough to give in-state tuition to illegals on that basis.

"This post was about Bachmann vs Romney on immigration."

This is my number one issue, but part of me worries that it may be a lost cause.

Anyway, I'm thinking that we need to avoid Texas politicians at all cost. They're just too compromised.

Damn, and Perry is so good looking too.

Half Sigma,

I know that you don't agree with me, but I think that overall, people with an IQ over 125 generally contribute a great deal to our nation by creating businesses and jobs and paying taxes. Or alternatively by producing children that eventually contribute to our nation

If we require IQ tests of any potential immigrant, and then we only allow in to America those potential immigrants that test over 125, and we allow no one in with an IQ under 125, In my humble opinion our country will be better off in the future.

however, immigrants with an IQ under 90 generally have children with low IQs. These low IQ children usually don't work that hard, usually wind up consuming more in services than they pay in taxes.

So I want to vote for a candidate that promises very strict IQ tests, and promises to not allow in to America anyone with IQ below that level.

And of course strict mandatory e verify in order to insure that all illegals now in America leave.

Half, it seems to me that none of the candidates now running for office are promising what I want.

Anyone on this blog know of any politician at any level of government, even local government, that publicly advocates ONLY high IQ immigrants be allowed in to America?

"Unless the immigration law is something like, "Whites only," it'll uphold. Federal law, that is; state law is anyone's guess."

Why couldn't they have a whites only policy or all Asian or whatever? It was done in the past in the 1924 Immigration Act? It was based on national origin. Does it say in the Constitution you can't do that?

“Seems fair enough to give in-state tuition to illegals on that basis.”

Yeah, a $100,000 tuition break for undocumentables is fair because out-of-staters need to go back to where they came from. We here don’t fancy their kind. Undocumentables need cheap education in order to do the jobs that Americans won’t do.

Half Sigma, did you know your buddy Chris Christie supports amnesty?

I want to know how HS got into art (his chess and painting post). It doesn't jive with his CS and JD training. Was this purely for fun? Does he have a creative side? Or was this simply part of the SWPL class climbing motivations? I highly respect HS for his frank self-assessments.

I'm with the commenter above who pointed you toward Obama's actual record. The administration simply made deporting undocumented criminals the highest priority. Is this incorrect to you? Do you think the INS has the resources to simply deport -ALL- illegals?

"[Obama] has directed INS to not deport any illegal aliens unless they have committed serious crimes. This policy is outrageous."

The basic problem is that although Congress has more than doubled funding for immigration courts and deportation proceedings in the last five years, this has not kept up with the rate illegals are being detained. Mainly because of programs that allow local police to detain suspected illegal immigrants, ICE has been flooded with more illegals than they can deport. In California illegals now wait 643 day for their deportation case to be heard. Most of these illegals have to be released pending their hearing because ICE does not have the funding or facilities to hold them for that long.

If we want to use local police to arrest more suspected illegal immigrants, then we need to double or quadruple the budget for immigration courts and detention centers yet again.

The Obama administration cannot increase that budget. Congress has to do that. What the Obama administration is doing saying given that we don't have the budget to deport all the suspected illegal immigrants that we are detaining, make those that have committed serious crimes the first priority to be deport. This will result in some other illegals not being deported now. If Congress can make large increases in the budget, then ICE can have the resources to work through this backlog of deportation cases.

"Welcome to my generation. If success is about standing out and not fitting in then shining bright today has never been easier."


Yup. My 13 year old son just got his first job. $30/hr.

I don't think illegals should get in state tuition.

However, they do actually pay taxes in the case of Texas. Texas taxes are regressive and Texas effectively collects the taxes they impose. Texas doesn't have income tax which is easy to dodge. It isn't really possible to live for years in Texas and not pay taxes. First there is sales tax on pretty much everything, so that is about 6% of all $ spent. The poorer people are, the greater the proportion they spend. Then there is property tax. I can promise you that no landlords are eating that tax. They pass it on to the renters. So every person in Texas is effectively paying 2.5% of the appraised value of the place where he is living. So living in some trashy rental worth $50k, he is paying $1250 a year in taxes. This also depresses property values in Texas because such a large percentage of the value must be paid in taxes every year and that raises the monthly rent/mortgage payments.

Even though illegals are more of a drain than an asset, the residency tuition deal in Texas makes more sense than it does in a lot of states that don't tax the poor much at all.

"Yeah, a $100,000 tuition break for undocumentables is fair because out-of-staters need to go back to where they came from."

There is no reason to treat an illegal who graduated from a TX high school and lived there for three years before doing so differently from a native-born person who graduated from a TX high school and lived there for three years before doing so.

Great, 60 Minutes is doing a profile of the neo Nazi movement in the US, including by implication a nice smear on anti-immigrationists. So we're all Nazis now.

"Between 'em, still pretty much a wash."

No, not a wash. Rick Perry in 2001 said he supported Bush's amnesty plan (he actually used the word "amnesty"). Romney opposed it.

You can find fault with Romney's record and there is a part of me that isn't sure I can trust him. But going by their records, Perry is horrendous on immigration, and Romney is somewhat better. And Romney's by far the best of the electable candidates in 2012.

OT, but hilarious:

http://news.yahoo.com/hurts-did-africans-tell-europeans-185638645.html

African finance ministers give European leaders a lecture on debt management, pointing to solid economic growth in Sub-Saharan Africa as a model for European improvement.

"Do you think the INS has the resources to simply deport -ALL- illegals?"

Yes. And Operation Wetback II would not be a bad idea.

[HS: Obama could always ask Congress for more funding, but the thing is that Obama doesn't want more funding for this, he WANTS illegals to stay here.]

"Yup. My 13 year old son just got his first job. $30/hr."

Without getting into specifics what does he do?

Has Tom Tancredo endorsed anyone yet?

I think youre wrong about Obamas record on immigration enforcement. Obama has done more to protect the US borders than any recent president. Check out his 2010 border bill. Unlike Reagan, who granted amnesty to all illegals, Obama has not granted amnesty.

'[HS: Obama could always ask Congress for more funding, but the thing is that Obama doesn't want more funding for this, he WANTS illegals to stay here.]'

He asked for more than half a billion dollars of extra funding for border security in June 2010. Does that qualify?

"Perry is horrendous on immigration, and Romney is somewhat better. And Romney's by far the best of the electable candidates in 2012."

Even if I accept that argument, Romney is a pussy RINO on just about every other issue, while Perry is not.

"Romney is a pussy RINO on just about every other issue,"

Even if he's a flip flopper, at least he's smart enough to flip on immigration in the right direction.

Romney is only a RINO on social policy dog whistle issues like abortion and gay marraige. While I oppose both gay marriage and gay civil unions because I think promoting marriage is a useful way to organize society (and not because I have religious beliefs against homosexuality), the social issues aren't as important as the economy.

On economics and foreign policy, Romney doesn't appear to be too different from the other Republican candidates, and Romney is moving more conservative on immigration, a subject Perry is terrible on.

Unless social policy is so important to you that you don't want to vote for Romney even though he's as good on the economy as Perry and much better than Perry on immigration, then Romney should be the your choice, unless Perry starts moving to Romney's right on immigration.

The comments to this entry are closed.