Poll: 63% of Americans favor letting illegal immigrants become citizens if they pass a background check and learn English

[Scott & Lai 12]

there's another protest right now.. there's a convoy going to DC (think already made it there) supported by the TV Channel Univison.. where they gathered 1 mill signatures and gave the letter to the White House...

Any word on how may of those signatures are from folks eligible to vote around here? Those would be the only one's that actually matter. Signatures of wanna-be immigrants mean jack.

Even so - there's a certain amount of safety in organized movements.

I'm sure the Mafia and street gangs would agree

[Scott & Lai 12]

They were destitute when they got here. If they have been here 20+ years then they should have something saved up. If they are still destitute when we ship them back to where they belong then it's their own fault. And squatters rights don't apply to immigration regardless of how PC it sounds.

Maybe - but as they say possession is 9/10 of the law, and like it or not - those people are already here... and judging by the demonstrations in the south of the country - there would seem to be something of an organised movement to protect their interests.

I'd go as far as to suggest that this is the reason why few politicians are standing up to propose and ratify legislation that meets the broader public demands. If in doing so it causes a political schism in the country - its not surprising that this has become something of a circular debate in the house and senate. Lots of talk, little action. In other worlds, little different to approach taken over the last 30-40 years.

meaning ownership ... this is 9/10 of the laws. what do they legally own ?

and if they own ... show documentation of legal status.

What exactly does "possession is 9/10 of the law" mean? Which law would that be? Why "9/10"? Why not 10/10 or 3/10 or 7/10? And is it really intended to mean that if I take something that is not mine to take, but hold on to it long enough, then I gain a right of ownership over it which supercedes the ownership rights of the person I took it from??

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

there's another protest right now.. there's a convoy going to DC (think already made it there) supported by the TV Channel Univison.. where they gathered 1 mill signatures and gave the letter to the White House...

Any word on how may of those signatures are from folks eligible to vote around here? Those would be the only one's that actually matter. Signatures of wanna-be immigrants mean jack.

Even so - there's a certain amount of safety in organized movements.

Safety? That still doesn't give any weight to any signature under what is to serve as a petition to this government. If you don't get to vote, you don't get to petition either. Those folks are not even so much as guests seeing that they weren't invited or overstayed their welcome.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

there's another protest right now.. there's a convoy going to DC (think already made it there) supported by the TV Channel Univison.. where they gathered 1 mill signatures and gave the letter to the White House...

Any word on how may of those signatures are from folks eligible to vote around here? Those would be the only one's that actually matter. Signatures of wanna-be immigrants mean jack.

Even so - there's a certain amount of safety in organized movements.

Safety? That still doesn't give any weight to any signature under what is to serve as a petition to this government. If you don't get to vote, you don't get to petition either. Those folks are not even so much as guests seeing that they weren't invited or overstayed their welcome.

I doubt it's just illegal aliens. They do have some support from sympathetic USCs.

[natty bumppo 289]

They were destitute when they got here. If they have been here 20+ years then they should have something saved up. If they are still destitute when we ship them back to where they belong then it's their own fault. And squatters rights don't apply to immigration regardless of how PC it sounds.

Maybe - but as they say possession is 9/10 of the law, and like it or not - those people are already here... and judging by the demonstrations in the south of the country - there would seem to be something of an organised movement to protect their interests.

I'd go as far as to suggest that this is the reason why few politicians are standing up to propose and ratify legislation that meets the broader public demands. If in doing so it causes a political schism in the country - its not surprising that this has become something of a circular debate in the house and senate. Lots of talk, little action. In other worlds, little different to approach taken over the last 30-40 years.

meaning ownership ... this is 9/10 of the laws. what do they legally own ?

and if they own ... show documentation of legal status.

What exactly does "possession is 9/10 of the law" mean? Which law would that be? Why "9/10"? Why not 10/10 or 3/10 or 7/10? And is it really intended to mean that if I take something that is not mine to take, but hold on to it long enough, then I gain a right of ownership over it which supercedes the ownership rights of the person I took it from??

The OP of this comment used an expression that deals with property ownership. If you take something ... using your example ... steal .... and hold onto it long enough, it is still theft.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

there's another protest right now.. there's a convoy going to DC (think already made it there) supported by the TV Channel Univison.. where they gathered 1 mill signatures and gave the letter to the White House...

Any word on how may of those signatures are from folks eligible to vote around here? Those would be the only one's that actually matter. Signatures of wanna-be immigrants mean jack.

Even so - there's a certain amount of safety in organized movements.

Safety? That still doesn't give any weight to any signature under what is to serve as a petition to this government. If you don't get to vote, you don't get to petition either. Those folks are not even so much as guests seeing that they weren't invited or overstayed their welcome.

I doubt it's just illegal aliens. They do have some support from sympathetic USCs.

I neither think nor said that there is only signatures from illegals on this "letter".

I simply wondered what the number of signatures that actually matter might be.

[Caladan 19]

They were destitute when they got here. If they have been here 20+ years then they should have something saved up. If they are still destitute when we ship them back to where they belong then it's their own fault. And squatters rights don't apply to immigration regardless of how PC it sounds.

Maybe - but as they say possession is 9/10 of the law, and like it or not - those people are already here... and judging by the demonstrations in the south of the country - there would seem to be something of an organised movement to protect their interests.

I'd go as far as to suggest that this is the reason why few politicians are standing up to propose and ratify legislation that meets the broader public demands. If in doing so it causes a political schism in the country - its not surprising that this has become something of a circular debate in the house and senate. Lots of talk, little action. In other worlds, little different to approach taken over the last 30-40 years.

meaning ownership ... this is 9/10 of the laws. what do they legally own ?

and if they own ... show documentation of legal status.

What exactly does "possession is 9/10 of the law" mean? Which law would that be? Why "9/10"? Why not 10/10 or 3/10 or 7/10? And is it really intended to mean that if I take something that is not mine to take, but hold on to it long enough, then I gain a right of ownership over it which supercedes the ownership rights of the person I took it from??

The OP of this comment used an expression that deals with property ownership. If you take something ... using your example ... steal .... and hold onto it long enough, it is still theft.

The phrase 'possession is 9/10ths of the law' refers to where the general presumption lies in a dispute over property. If you insist that the land my house on should be yours because of the interpretation of some old statute that accidentally gave my greatgrandfather your greatgrandfather's land, but I'm living there and improving the property, chances are I have a pretty good case even if you're right on the merits.

As it'd apply here, it's not that the illegal immigrants are stealing anything. Just that if you fail to enforce the laws for 20 years, and let 11 million illegals in, while by the letter of the law they have no right to be here, the spirit with which the laws are enforced gives them a pretty good claim to legitimacy.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

They were destitute when they got here. If they have been here 20+ years then they should have something saved up. If they are still destitute when we ship them back to where they belong then it's their own fault. And squatters rights don't apply to immigration regardless of how PC it sounds.

Maybe - but as they say possession is 9/10 of the law, and like it or not - those people are already here... and judging by the demonstrations in the south of the country - there would seem to be something of an organised movement to protect their interests.

I'd go as far as to suggest that this is the reason why few politicians are standing up to propose and ratify legislation that meets the broader public demands. If in doing so it causes a political schism in the country - its not surprising that this has become something of a circular debate in the house and senate. Lots of talk, little action. In other worlds, little different to approach taken over the last 30-40 years.

meaning ownership ... this is 9/10 of the laws. what do they legally own ?

and if they own ... show documentation of legal status.

What exactly does "possession is 9/10 of the law" mean? Which law would that be? Why "9/10"? Why not 10/10 or 3/10 or 7/10? And is it really intended to mean that if I take something that is not mine to take, but hold on to it long enough, then I gain a right of ownership over it which supercedes the ownership rights of the person I took it from??

The OP of this comment used an expression that deals with property ownership. If you take something ... using your example ... steal .... and hold onto it long enough, it is still theft.

The phrase 'possession is 9/10ths of the law' refers to where the general presumption lies in a dispute over property. If you insist that the land my house on should be yours because of the interpretation of some old statute that accidentally gave my greatgrandfather your greatgrandfather's land, but I'm living there and improving the property, chances are I have a pretty good case even if you're right on the merits.

As it'd apply here, it's not that the illegal immigrants are stealing anything. Just that if you fail to enforce the laws for 20 years, and let 11 million illegals in, while by the letter of the law they have no right to be here, the spirit with which the laws are enforced gives them a pretty good claim to legitimacy.

That's about the size of it.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I neither think nor said that there is only signatures from illegals on this "letter".

I simply wondered what the number of signatures that actually matter might be.

I know for a fact there aren't - several people I can think of offhand of several people that I used to work with back in LA (mostly people of hispanic background who have both USC and Mexican relatives). I think a large movement of angry people (regardless of legality) would tend to 'matter' regardless of whether or not we think they have much claim to an opinion.

Edited June 17, 2007 by erekose

[natty bumppo 289]

They were destitute when they got here. If they have been here 20+ years then they should have something saved up. If they are still destitute when we ship them back to where they belong then it's their own fault. And squatters rights don't apply to immigration regardless of how PC it sounds.

Maybe - but as they say possession is 9/10 of the law, and like it or not - those people are already here... and judging by the demonstrations in the south of the country - there would seem to be something of an organised movement to protect their interests.

I'd go as far as to suggest that this is the reason why few politicians are standing up to propose and ratify legislation that meets the broader public demands. If in doing so it causes a political schism in the country - its not surprising that this has become something of a circular debate in the house and senate. Lots of talk, little action. In other worlds, little different to approach taken over the last 30-40 years.

meaning ownership ... this is 9/10 of the laws. what do they legally own ?

and if they own ... show documentation of legal status.

What exactly does "possession is 9/10 of the law" mean? Which law would that be? Why "9/10"? Why not 10/10 or 3/10 or 7/10? And is it really intended to mean that if I take something that is not mine to take, but hold on to it long enough, then I gain a right of ownership over it which supercedes the ownership rights of the person I took it from??

The OP of this comment used an expression that deals with property ownership. If you take something ... using your example ... steal .... and hold onto it long enough, it is still theft.

The phrase 'possession is 9/10ths of the law' refers to where the general presumption lies in a dispute over property. If you insist that the land my house on should be yours because of the interpretation of some old statute that accidentally gave my greatgrandfather your greatgrandfather's land, but I'm living there and improving the property, chances are I have a pretty good case even if you're right on the merits.

As it'd apply here, it's not that the illegal immigrants are stealing anything. Just that if you fail to enforce the laws for 20 years, and let 11 million illegals in, while by the letter of the law they have no right to be here, the spirit with which the laws are enforced gives them a pretty good claim to legitimacy.

That's about the size of it.

Illegal aliens aren't stealing (misappropriating) anything from society? ...

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I neither think nor said that there is only signatures from illegals on this "letter".

I simply wondered what the number of signatures that actually matter might be.

I know for a fact there aren't - several people I can think of offhand of several people that I used to work with back in LA (mostly people of hispanic background who have both USC and Mexican relatives). I think a large movement of angry people (regardless of legality) would tend to 'matter' regardless of whether or not we think they have much claim to an opinion.

They (those here illegally) can have all the opinions they want. See what I care. But I suggest they take those opinions to their respective Consulates in DC rather than to Capitol Hill. Because effectively petition this government of ours, they cannot.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Because effectively petition this government of ours, they cannot.

Maybe you think they shouldn't be able to, but whether they can do so effectively or not will be borne by the success or failure of this legislation. Time will tell. My sense is that amnesty is coming and no one can stop it.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Because effectively petition this government of ours, they cannot.

Maybe you think they shouldn't be able to, but whether they can do so effectively or not will be borne by the success or failure of this legislation. Time will tell. My sense is that amnesty is coming and no one can stop it.

That's as I see it.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

They were destitute when they got here. If they have been here 20+ years then they should have something saved up. If they are still destitute when we ship them back to where they belong then it's their own fault. And squatters rights don't apply to immigration regardless of how PC it sounds.

Maybe - but as they say possession is 9/10 of the law, and like it or not - those people are already here... and judging by the demonstrations in the south of the country - there would seem to be something of an organised movement to protect their interests.

I'd go as far as to suggest that this is the reason why few politicians are standing up to propose and ratify legislation that meets the broader public demands. If in doing so it causes a political schism in the country - its not surprising that this has become something of a circular debate in the house and senate. Lots of talk, little action. In other worlds, little different to approach taken over the last 30-40 years.

meaning ownership ... this is 9/10 of the laws. what do they legally own ?

and if they own ... show documentation of legal status.

What exactly does "possession is 9/10 of the law" mean? Which law would that be? Why "9/10"? Why not 10/10 or 3/10 or 7/10? And is it really intended to mean that if I take something that is not mine to take, but hold on to it long enough, then I gain a right of ownership over it which supercedes the ownership rights of the person I took it from??

The OP of this comment used an expression that deals with property ownership. If you take something ... using your example ... steal .... and hold onto it long enough, it is still theft.

The phrase 'possession is 9/10ths of the law' refers to where the general presumption lies in a dispute over property. If you insist that the land my house on should be yours because of the interpretation of some old statute that accidentally gave my greatgrandfather your greatgrandfather's land, but I'm living there and improving the property, chances are I have a pretty good case even if you're right on the merits.

As it'd apply here, it's not that the illegal immigrants are stealing anything. Just that if you fail to enforce the laws for 20 years, and let 11 million illegals in, while by the letter of the law they have no right to be here, the spirit with which the laws are enforced gives them a pretty good claim to legitimacy.

That's about the size of it.

Illegal aliens aren't stealing (misappropriating) anything from society? ...

I think some circular logic and contextual tom-foolery is going on here. You asked for a clarification of the "9/10ths of the law" comment - based on your assertion that it relates specifically to property ownership. They key part of the statement above is:

...if you fail to enforce the laws for 20 years, and let 11 million illegals in, while by the letter of the law they have no right to be here, the spirit with which the laws are enforced gives them a pretty good claim to legitimacy.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Because effectively petition this government of ours, they cannot.

Maybe you think they shouldn't be able to, but whether they can do so effectively or not will be borne by the success or failure of this legislation. Time will tell. My sense is that amnesty is coming and no one can stop it.

The profiteers (businesses and immigration lawyers) are purchasing this amnesty. That is why it's coming. If it's coming. This wouldn't be the first amnesty that makes it through the Senate only to die in the House.

Edited June 17, 2007 by ET-US2004