Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

[Priceless]

Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

It's my understanding that this isn't "the point" of the legislation; it's more so that they can enroll in college without their family being threatened with deportation....though not every state's version of the proposed bill is the same.

Oh, well we definitely want to punish kids for the sins of their parents (I think that's in the Bible) so I can understand the opposition.

[LynahFan]

Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

So why shouldn't they pay in-state tuition?

Who here has said that they have a problem with legal residents paying in-state tuition?

[Priceless]

Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

Who here has said that they have a problem with legal residents paying in-state tuition?

They have implied that legal residents are not citizens. I am asking for some clarification. I believe Bob has told us in the past that "anchor babies" who are born in these United States should not be considered citizens and are thus illegal aliens themselves.

People here illegally should get 0 benefits from their illegal activity.

Yah. So an illegal gets to pay in state tuition, but a kid from the next state over pays out of state tuition. Such things are all too common in this nation anymore.

[walrus]

Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

Legal residents already get in state tuition, don't they?

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

Yeah - I think there are some crossed signals here. The proposed law would deny in-state tuition to someone who entered unlawfully as a child. But I can't see how it would apply to a U.S. citizen (like someone born in the U.S. to parents who arrived unlawfully). I guess that's the difference

[LynahFan]

Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

They have implied that legal residents are not citizens. I am asking for some clarification. I believe Bob has told us in the past that "anchor babies" who are born in these United States should not be considered citizens and are thus illegal aliens themselves.

Ah, so you're still having some other conversation. It would be less confusing if you would join this one.

[Bob Gray]

Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

Yeah - I think there are some crossed signals here. The proposed law would deny in-state tuition to someone who entered unlawfully as a child. But I can't see how it would apply to a U.S. citizen (like someone born in the U.S. to parents who arrived unlawfully). I guess that's the difference

Yes.

[Priceless]

Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

Ah, so you're still having some other conversation. It would be less confusing if you would join this one.

I'm asking for some clarification because their views on other issues do not make sense when applied to this situation. But I guess some consistency is too much to ask. My apologies.

[Bob Gray]

Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

I'm asking for some clarification because their views on other issues do not make sense when applied to this situation. But I guess some consistency is too much to ask. My apologies.

Not fun when you get caught commenting on a subject you aren't that familiar with, eh?

[Priceless]

Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

Not fun when you get caught commenting on a subject you aren't that familiar with, eh?

Not fun when you get caught being a hypocrite, eh?

[Twitch Boy]

Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

Edwards not guilty on one charge, mistrial declared on the other five.

*fail horn*

[Old Pio]

Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

Yah. So an illegal gets to pay in state tuition, but a kid from the next state over pays out of state tuition. Such things are all too common in this nation anymore.

The "proximity" argument has no bearing here. The issue is residency. A kid who lives in California has no more claim to pay in-state tuition at the U of A than a kid from Rhode Island. The kid in "the next state over" pays in-state tuition in that state.

And if the children of illegal aliens don't pay in state tuition, what do they pay? Or do you just prohibit them from attending state schools? And is it in the long term best interests of a state to erect barriors for these kids (who have been graduated from state high schools) to get access to higher education? And is it fair to punish the children of illegals? Children who had nothing to do with the illegality? Every one of these kids should move toward citizenship as fast as possible. And if that means we have to simplify or compress the process, we should at least consider it.

IMO, the first order of business in dealing with illegal immigration is to stop it. The question of what we do with the millions of illegals and their kids who are already here is a much larger, more complicated problem. Rounding up 10 or 12 million people and shipping them out would be a legal, ethical, logistical quaqmire. I doubt we could afford it, even if we tried. It would, however, usher in a golden age for the open borders crowd and the ACLU.

In formulating our policy here, we should be careful not to cut off our nose to spite our face. At some point, we'll have enough bus boys and leaf blowers. Then what? Wouldn't we be better off if at least some of these young people got an education that prepared them for 21st century jobs and for citizenship, too? For the most part, having been graduated from state high schools, these young people are indistinguishable from other kids of Latino heritage, except for their immigration status. That's an important distinction, to be sure, but these kids aren't exactly Hester Prynne.

[Kepler]

Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

Edwards not guilty on one charge, mistrial declared on the other five.

*fail horn*

Holy...

How is that possible? Is it just that every prosecutor in the US is a failbot now?

"Your honor, we find the defendant incredibly guilty."

[Old Pio]

Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

Holy...

How is that possible? Is it just that every prosecutor in the US is a failbot now?

"Your honor, we find the defendant incredibly guilty."

Some articles I've read indicated that this was a prosecutorial reach, based more on the slimy character of this guy and less on the law. I believe NRO, among others, made that point. Frankly, I haven't been following it closely. I'm just satisfied he's out of public life. Although that could be a temporary matter. Just ask Alcee Hastings. I mean, what's to prevent this repulsive twerp from finding a pocket borough somewhere to send him to congress? Nada.

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Elections 2012: You must choose the lesser of two weevils

Edwards not guilty on one charge, mistrial declared on the other five.

*fail horn*

Politicians worthy of admiration thread is over there ----->

(or is that defense attorneys worthy of admiration)