The Immigrant Health Care Bill

[rika60607 215]

OOoooooo!

That explains everything!

Thank you Rebecca!

It's from a nationally recognized immigration reform organization often interviewed and quoted by the mainstream media.

Um.

No.

The Stein Report is a project of FAIR.

[Ban Hammer 13,481]

Then please vote!

Of course apart from sheer numbers to make the poll credible, I'd have to ask for proofs and go after people instead of people volunteering their choices... BTW, Peejay, is this your "did not complete high school" vote there?

ditto - but i doubt that all that could give a credible poll would vote.

why would i vote? i'm not the beneficiary.

i'm sure nessa can find the polls section of vj.

[peejay 327]

It's from a nationally recognized immigration reform organization often interviewed and quoted by the mainstream media.

Um.

No.

The Stein Report is a project of FAIR.

http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile...igration_Reform

The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) has two major goals: (1) "to end illegal immigration," and (2) "to set legal immigration at the lowest feasible levels consistent with the demographic, economic, social, and environmental realities."................

FAIR was created following a factional split in Zero Population Growth led by John Tanton. Along with Sidney Swensrud and Sharon Barnes, Tanton founded FAIR in 1979. FAIR's links to other local and national organizations that are stridently anti-immigrant, anti-Latino, and supremacist have undermined FAIR's own credibility and led to questions about the underlying agenda of its restrictionist approach to immigration. Referring to FAIR and associated groups, the Southern Poverty Law Center concluded an article on immigrant hate groups stating: "Opinion polls consistently show that a majority of Americans believe that immigration needs to be cut below current levels, although that does not imply that they support the ideas of white supremacists or other bigots.. The danger is not that immigration levels are debated by Americans, but that the debate is controlled by bigots and extremists whose views are anathema to the ideals on which this country was founded."...............

The Wall Street Journal describes FAIR's agenda as having "less to do with immigration per se and more to do with environmental extremism and population-growth concerns influenced by the discredited claims of the 19th-century British economist Thomas Malthus."

Your opinion? Or something you dug up on the internet?

It is obvious that when you cannot kill the message...you go after the messenger. Name calling and innuendo still doesn't negate the statistics presented.

As I stated earlier...if you disagree with the statistics presented...how about refuting them instead of employing attacks and innuendo?

I don't particularly care for groups you likely support such as MALDEF and LaRaza. Nor do I care for the liberal left wing agendas of SPLC or the ACLU either (which I'm sure you also support). However I prefer to use published statistics rather than employing innuendo and self serving labels to debating the issues.

So far neither you or rika60607 have done absolutely nothing to refute the statistics presented. Your repeated use of the race card in debating the immigration issue is a diversion to the real issues at hand.

Edited December 3, 2009 by peejay

[HAL 9000 96]

So if RJ likely supports those 'liberal left wing' groups then we can likely conclude you support 'ultra nationalist right wing' groups and call it even.

[peejay 327]

So if RJ likely supports those 'liberal left wing' groups then we can likely conclude you support 'ultra nationalist right wing' groups and call it even.

Wrong again. Actually I consider myself an American that puts my country and its best interests first. As it stands, the current broken immigration agenda has become a burden rather than an asset to the vast majority of Americans. Therefore it is not and has not been in the best interests of the vast majority of Americans. It is apparent that it is a burden. Real reform and real change is necessary to make it an asset rather than a burden. Not another illegal alien amnesty (that would be #8 since 1986) and continued blind mass chain migration without regard to benefit to the USA. The statistics presented speak for themselves as to the failure of the current system.

Edited December 3, 2009 by peejay

[SMR 368]

I've said it before but since it seems to apply here, I'll say it again. Health care reform that provides health care for the uninsured, essentially implies subsidization. The uninsured are that way for a reason, because they can't really afford insurance. Since these people can't afford health care, they are probably below or near the poverty level. That means they aren't paying much, if any, income tax.

So why does it matter what country they were born in? We're all here on VJ because we don't think being born in America makes someone better or more entitled. Why do we have no problem with paying for someone's health insurance if they were born in the US but don't work and pay taxes but think it's suddenly horrible if we are paying for health insurance for someone from Mexico?

And on the subject of education, one word: Mexicans. It's not that I have anything against them. But we share a huge, under regulated land border with a poor country with a large uneducated population. And to be fair, the article doesn't specify adult immigrants, so there could be some children pulling that ninth grade number down.

[HAL 9000 96]

So if RJ likely supports those 'liberal left wing' groups then we can likely conclude you support 'ultra nationalist right wing' groups and call it even.

Wrong again. Actually I consider myself an American that puts my country and its best interests first. As it stands, the current broken immigration agenda has become a burden rather than an asset to the vast majority of Americans. Therefore it is not and has not been in the best interests of the vast majority of Americans. It is apparent that it is a burden. Real reform and real change is necessary to make it an asset rather than a burden. Not another illegal alien amnesty (that would be #8 since 1986) and continued blind mass chain migration without regard to benefit to the USA. The statistics presented speak for themselves as to the failure of the current system.

Sounds reasonable to me. I just try not to make idiotic conclusions based on others' humanist perspectives.

The way things stand with the system- yes, as its been rehashed here a million times, needs to change. How that deals with those already here is where most people interested in people, will differ with you.

Then again, you make an accusation based on your perspective of things... and most others that notice yours also make theirs.

[rebeccajo 14]

I don't particularly care for groups you likely support such as MALDEF and LaRaza. Nor do I care for the liberal left wing agendas of SPLC or the ACLU either (which I'm sure you also support). However I prefer to use published statistics rather than employing innuendo and self serving labels to debating the issues.

Tsk Tsk. There you go a$$-uming stuff again.

I don't support 'groups'. I don't have the money.

As far as what I believe - I read around. I don't read right-wing xenophobic trash and I don't read ultra liberal garbage.

There is racism on both sides of the aisle. Tanton is a hate-mongering racist on the right side. I wouldn't give you ten cents for any 'statistic' published by his organization.

Edited December 3, 2009 by rebeccajo

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

The problem is not whether or not the Government confiscation of our economy will help illegal aliens (they are not "immigrants" there is no such thingas an "illegal immigrant", immigrants are legal) or not, the problem is it will confiscate a large part of our economy, even bigger than the auto manufacturers.

It is like arguing, when playing Russian roulette, whether it is better to put the gun in your mouth or against your temple? Like it will affect the outcome?

[peejay 327]

I don't particularly care for groups you likely support such as MALDEF and LaRaza. Nor do I care for the liberal left wing agendas of SPLC or the ACLU either (which I'm sure you also support). However I prefer to use published statistics rather than employing innuendo and self serving labels to debating the issues.

Tsk Tsk. There you go a$$-uming stuff again.

I don't support 'groups'. I don't have the money.

As far as what I believe - I read around. I don't read right-wing xenophobic trash and I don't read ultra liberal garbage.

There is racism on both sides of the aisle. Tanton is a hate-mongering racist on the right side. I wouldn't give you ten cents for any 'statistic' published by his organization.

If the statistics are a lie...why not refute them instead of stating that you don't and won't believe them because you disagree with the mission of the organization? That sounds more like burying your head in the sand rather than debating the issue.

[rebeccajo 14]

I don't particularly care for groups you likely support such as MALDEF and LaRaza. Nor do I care for the liberal left wing agendas of SPLC or the ACLU either (which I'm sure you also support). However I prefer to use published statistics rather than employing innuendo and self serving labels to debating the issues.

Tsk Tsk. There you go a$$-uming stuff again.

I don't support 'groups'. I don't have the money.

As far as what I believe - I read around. I don't read right-wing xenophobic trash and I don't read ultra liberal garbage.

There is racism on both sides of the aisle. Tanton is a hate-mongering racist on the right side. I wouldn't give you ten cents for any 'statistic' published by his organization.

If the statistics are a lie...why not refute them instead of stating that you don't and won't believe them because you disagree with the mission of the organization? That sounds more like burying your head in the sand rather than debating the issue.

Two reasons - summarily, I refuse to have a battle of wits with unarmed individuals.

Specifically, the arguments of FAIR against legal immigration are IMO fundamentally in conflict with the great historical past of this nation.

I'm simply not going to even consider 'statistics' presented with a slant.

[HAL 9000 96]

I don't particularly care for groups you likely support such as MALDEF and LaRaza. Nor do I care for the liberal left wing agendas of SPLC or the ACLU either (which I'm sure you also support). However I prefer to use published statistics rather than employing innuendo and self serving labels to debating the issues.

Tsk Tsk. There you go a$-uming stuff again.

I don't support 'groups'. I don't have the money.

As far as what I believe - I read around. I don't read right-wing xenophobic trash and I don't read ultra liberal garbage.

There is racism on both sides of the aisle. Tanton is a hate-mongering racist on the right side. I wouldn't give you ten cents for any 'statistic' published by his organization.

If the statistics are a lie...why not refute them instead of stating that you don't and won't believe them because you disagree with the mission of the organization? That sounds more like burying your head in the sand rather than debating the issue.

I guess its the same thing as labeling an entire organization according to one of its platforms in favor of a humanist approach to immigration reform as leftist?

Maybe that's why people see through people like you.

[peejay 327]

I don't particularly care for groups you likely support such as MALDEF and LaRaza. Nor do I care for the liberal left wing agendas of SPLC or the ACLU either (which I'm sure you also support). However I prefer to use published statistics rather than employing innuendo and self serving labels to debating the issues.

Tsk Tsk. There you go a$$-uming stuff again.

I don't support 'groups'. I don't have the money.

As far as what I believe - I read around. I don't read right-wing xenophobic trash and I don't read ultra liberal garbage.

There is racism on both sides of the aisle. Tanton is a hate-mongering racist on the right side. I wouldn't give you ten cents for any 'statistic' published by his organization.

If the statistics are a lie...why not refute them instead of stating that you don't and won't believe them because you disagree with the mission of the organization? That sounds more like burying your head in the sand rather than debating the issue.

Two reasons - summarily, I refuse to have a battle of wits with unarmed individuals.

Specifically, the arguments of FAIR against legal immigration are IMO fundamentally in conflict with the great historical past of this nation.

I'm simply not going to even consider 'statistics' presented with a slant.

So...21st century immigration policy should be based on 18th, 19th, and early 20th century America? Has it ever occurred to you that this America doesn't exist anymore?

I'm an American born US citizen married to an immigrant. My American born mother's parents were working class 20th century immigrants. I have and still do maintain a relationship with my mom's foreign relatives and have visited the land of my ancestors many times. I live in a city whose population consists of 1/4 foreign born (with roughly a little less than half of that number being illegal aliens). So I do have a horse in this race whether you disagree with my views or not. Immigration should be an asset to America, not a burden imposed on it by importing the poor, uneducated, and unskilled on a massive scale into a modern 21st century welfare state that didn't exist in your so-called "great historical past". That has not been nor is it now desirable to most Americans, but that is what the current system appears to be doing.

The current system is broken and does not serve the best interests of the broad base of the American people and is a burden. The current administration's proposal to reform the system is to continue on the same failed path. Continued repeated amnesties, even more liberal chain migration policies, and continued disregard for long standing existing immigration / workplace laws are not reform. Why this insane path continues is beyond comprehension. Both political parties are to blame for this malfeasance for their own selfish agendas (cheap labor vs. cheap votes). It certainly does not benefit the vast majority of Americans and in many cases is detrimental.

What is happening now does not even remotely resemble the immigration policies of the 18th, 19th, and early 20th century.

Edited December 3, 2009 by peejay

[peejay 327]

I don't particularly care for groups you likely support such as MALDEF and LaRaza. Nor do I care for the liberal left wing agendas of SPLC or the ACLU either (which I'm sure you also support). However I prefer to use published statistics rather than employing innuendo and self serving labels to debating the issues.

Tsk Tsk. There you go a$-uming stuff again.

I don't support 'groups'. I don't have the money.

As far as what I believe - I read around. I don't read right-wing xenophobic trash and I don't read ultra liberal garbage.

There is racism on both sides of the aisle. Tanton is a hate-mongering racist on the right side. I wouldn't give you ten cents for any 'statistic' published by his organization.

If the statistics are a lie...why not refute them instead of stating that you don't and won't believe them because you disagree with the mission of the organization? That sounds more like burying your head in the sand rather than debating the issue.

I guess its the same thing as labeling an entire organization according to one of its platforms in favor of a humanist approach to immigration reform as leftist?

Maybe that's why people see through people like you.

And since you are jumping on the wagon of someone that has thrown around the labels of "right-wing racist hate mongering anti-immigrant white supremacist environmental extremist xenophobic trash Malthus a$$-umer"...your transparency is there to see too.

[rebeccajo 14]

What is happening now does not even remotely resemble the immigration policies of the 18th, 19th, and early 20th century.

You got that right, peejay! It sure as the devil doesn't resemble the immigration policies of the 18th, 19th and early 20th century!

Back then all you had to do was get on a boat or walk across the border. At best they eventually started registering them at Ellis Island.

Then somebody decided they were skeered of the Chinese taking all the jobs. Then it was people from India we put quotas on. We rounded up the Japanese and put them camps to keep them 'safe'. Now it's anybody Hispanic or Middle Eastern who gets the American immigration equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition.

Here's the deal, peejay. If they come in legally, I'm all for it. Let 'em come by the boatload, planeload, boxcar load. I don't care. Give me your tired, your poor, your heavy laden. This is the US of A. They'll either swim here or sink and go home.