What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Bob Gray said:
My understanding is that the state authorities would turn over the illegals to the feds. But I recall reading some rumblings from the feds that they may choose to not be cooperative, which would put Arizona in a very awkward position. I guess it depends on just how much Obama wants to squeeze Arizona.
Click to expand...

My basic understanding (and this is more based on students than migrant workers) is that somebody (school, citizen, local law enforcement) calls the feds and says there's an illegal immigrant here. After a check for a criminal record (beyond their being in the US illegally) and a check of various watch lists maintained by the govt, the feds reply back that they're not interested in that person.

So, my guess is that catching illegals with a criminal record forces the feds hand. However, I don't believe by any Constitutional ruling that the state can force the feds to take action, which would leave Arizona in a no mans land of detaining the people, but never being able to get them out of state.
 
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Rover said:
My basic understanding (and this is more based on students than migrant workers) is that somebody (school, citizen, local law enforcement) calls the feds and says there's an illegal immigrant here. After a check for a criminal record (beyond their being in the US illegally) and a check of various watch lists maintained by the govt, the feds reply back that they're not interested in that person.

So, my guess is that catching illegals with a criminal record forces the feds hand. However, I don't believe by any Constitutional ruling that the state can force the feds to take action, which would leave Arizona in a no mans land of detaining the people, but never being able to get them out of state.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that there has for a long time been a process for local authorities to turn over illegals to the feds. So I don't think a whole new process would need to be created. But the twist is that the feds are thinking of not honoring the existing process, as a way for Obama to put the squeeze on Arizona (my interpretation, as of course Obama would not say such publicly, but the dots are easily connected). No doubt, if Arizona doesn't get cooperation from the feds, it'll be a big problem. But, with the feds suing and claiming sole jurisdiction on this issue, doesn't it make them look bad to then stand back and not accept illegals from the locals?
 
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

unofan said:
I'd think that should be "especially on the Mexican side." - the violence there has been far worse for far longer than it has on the U.S. side.
Click to expand...

True. I was coming at it from the angle that we're first and foremost concerned with our side of the border, but absotely what folks who live on the Mexican side have to deal with is much worse.
 
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Bob Gray said:
You can't possibly believe this drivel, can you? Border enforcement costs are negligible in the big budget picture, and far more important than the pork Obama has been slinging left and right. This may be the single most nonsensical post I've ever seen you make. We want the federal government to be fiscally conservative in this one area, while going pork-wild everywhere else, when this is more important and fundamental than a bunch of other stuff that the feds spend money on. It's laughable to say that properly securing the border in any way equates with expansion of federal government. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Thank you. I have 5mm on my mokusatsu list for being intellectually dishonest so I couldn't respond. Of course, he could also be dain bramaged, but my money is on intellectual dishonesty.
 
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Bob Gray said:
You can't possibly believe this drivel, can you? Border enforcement costs are negligible in the big budget picture, and far more important than the pork Obama has been slinging left and right. This may be the single most nonsensical post I've ever seen you make. We want the federal government to be fiscally conservative in this one area, while going pork-wild everywhere else, when this is more important and fundamental than a bunch of other stuff that the feds spend money on. It's laughable to say that properly securing the border in any way equates with expansion of federal government. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I said I believe we need we need decent government funding here...even so...

Your burning issue is immigration. I think we can see that. Well other's might be welfare, others the environment, others the military, still others universal healthcare.

So you want lots of federal funding for your burning issue(s) but not those of others. If you're actually a fiscal conservative...you would want reduced spending in all areas of government. Wanting large funding for your own burning issues but not those of others doesn't make you a fiscal conservative...that makes you just like everyone else.

You might say...ya, but my burning issue has great return on investment and pays for itself. Well news is that a huge number of government projects have great stated ROI. More return for police, education, the environment, stimulus, and yes even the military...cases have been made for them all.

I'm beginning to believe (with a potential exception of someone like Ron Paul), there are really no fiscal conservatives. The only reason its politically popular is because everyone is for cutting everyone elses issues but not their own couple. This discussion is an example of that. And teabaggers, who are all about cutting taxes, are largely those who just want to drive a bigger deficit.
 
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Except for the part where a true fiscal conservative is about as worthless as a true "fiscal liberal"

If you don't find balance between the two you're going to screw yourself from both sides.
 
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Harry Browne used to begin his campaign speeches by asking, "Would you give up everything you receive from the state in exchange for everything you give the state"?

If you can answer in the affirmative, you're a Platonic Ideal fiscal conservative (and you're rich enough to afford a private army). Short of that, it becomes a matter of how far you want to go: do you draw the line at a government postal service, the census, public housing, universal health care, guaranteed payment of education costs, a right to subsidized personal income, or no line at all?

We're all somewhere along the spectrum. "Fiscal conservatism" is largely a fiction created to feed on the resentment we all feel that everyone else is milking the system except us. It's the right's class war rhetoric, as suspect as the left's.

If people really believed in it, they would begin by cutting their own goodies. The Tea Partiers could opt out of all government services and entitlements -- they could refuse to accept a dollar of social security, Medicare or unemployment. They could refuse any government job, or any job that depended primarily on government contracts. Until then, they're really just like these guys.
 
Last edited:
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Kepler said:
Harry Browne used to begin his campaign speeches by asking, "Would you give up everything you receive from the state in exchange for everything you give the state"?
Click to expand...

"Roads? Where we're going we don't need roads."
 
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Kepler said:
If people really believed in it, they would begin by cutting their own goodies. The Tea Partiers could opt out of all government services and entitlements -- they could refuse to accept a dollar of social security, Medicare or unemployment. They could refuse any government job, or any job that depended primarily on government contracts. Until then, they're really just like these guys.
Click to expand...

Or perhaps like a politician who decries special interests while accepting their money?
 
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Kepler said:
If you can answer in the affirmative, you're a Platonic Ideal fiscal conservative (and you're rich enough to afford a private army). Short of that, it becomes a matter of how far you want to go: do you draw the line at a government postal service, the census, public housing, universal health care, guaranteed payment of education costs, a right to subsidized personal income, or no line at all?

We're all somewhere along the spectrum. "Fiscal conservatism" is largely a fiction created to feed on the resentment we all feel that everyone else is milking the system except us. It's the right's class war rhetoric, as suspect as the left's.

If people really believed in it, they would begin by cutting their own goodies. The Tea Partiers could opt out of all government services and entitlements -- they could refuse to accept a dollar of social security, Medicare or unemployment. They could refuse any government job, or any job that depended primarily on government contracts. Until then, they're really just like these guys.
Click to expand...


Exactly. Putting aside national defense or even supporting local law enforcement. Why is it the people most loudly protesting the govt are the same ones collecting unemployment, welfare, Social Security, or Medicare/Medicaid? At the very least you could swear off all of these so called unneccesary govt programs and live off the land or hunt squirrels when times are tough. This is the fundamental hypocrisy of modern day conservatism.
 
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

5mn_Major said:
I said I believe we need we need decent government funding here...even so...

Your burning issue is immigration. I think we can see that. Well other's might be welfare, others the environment, others the military, still others universal healthcare.

So you want lots of federal funding for your burning issue(s) but not those of others. If you're actually a fiscal conservative...you would want reduced spending in all areas of government. Wanting large funding for your own burning issues but not those of others doesn't make you a fiscal conservative...that makes you just like everyone else.

You might say...ya, but my burning issue has great return on investment and pays for itself. Well news is that a huge number of government projects have great stated ROI. More return for police, education, the environment, stimulus, and yes even the military...cases have been made for them all.

I'm beginning to believe (with a potential exception of someone like Ron Paul), there are really no fiscal conservatives. The only reason its politically popular is because everyone is for cutting everyone elses issues but not their own couple. This discussion is an example of that. And teabaggers, who are all about cutting taxes, are largely those who just want to drive a bigger deficit.
Click to expand...

More utter nonsense. Not all fed spending is equal, not even close. Some relates to basic functions, while other stuff is, to varying degrees fluff that we choose to spend money on, but if we didn't, our basic national functioning wouldn't be impaired. So, Byrd's center for research of butterfly diets (or whatever nonsense pork he always sent to W.V.) does not have equal footing with something like securing borders, unless you want to throw any kind of logic and common sense out the window. It's thinking like yours that has helped drive this nation into the fiscal mess it is in. Some spending is simply more critical and necessary than others in the real world. But, I'm coming to the conclusion that maybe you do.
 
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Fiscal conservatism is a fiction? Uh, yah. The fact that such an accusation would see the light of day again shows just how warped our national sensibilities have become. Blast the person who is, at least in a small way, supporting the reigning in of our fiscal insanity in this country. The fact is, the fiscal nonsense is so ingrained in how our nation functions that it's very hard to extricate yourself from it and still function in our society. But this difficulty is no license to rip anyone who in any way calls out our government and it's serial fiscal irresponsibility. But, unfortunately that's about how it works these days. Shoot the messenger. That'll solve everything. Sometimes I really wonder how much people care about the long term future of this country. :(
 
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

And more fun in Arizona. But, hey, we shouldn't want the feds to help us out, should we? :rolleyes:

Pinal County sheriff gets death threats:

http://www.azcentral.com/community/pinal/articles/2010/07/06/20100706pinal-county-sheriff-drug-cartel-threats.html

And the interview the the Pinal County deputy who was shot multiple times by drug runners was released:

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/07/08/20100708arizona-sheriffs-deputy-shootout-interview-released.html

But, hey, us Arizonans are just whiners who want federal pork. :rolleyes:
 
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Rover said:
Exactly. Putting aside national defense or even supporting local law enforcement. Why is it the people most loudly protesting the govt are the same ones collecting unemployment, welfare, Social Security, or Medicare/Medicaid? At the very least you could swear off all of these so called unneccesary govt programs and live off the land or hunt squirrels when times are tough. This is the fundamental hypocrisy of modern day conservatism.
Click to expand...

Not on unemployment or welfare (I did get a whopping $4 EITC when I was a sports information intern back in the day, though), am expecting social security to be gone (or significantly curtailed) by the time I'm eligible to collect it in ~40 years. Likewise I'm not on medicaid and medicare will likewise be long gone and or significantly altered in the ~40 years til I'm eligible for that. So fark you, you liberal hippie socialist communist. :cool:

Also, Fiscal conservatism is not the same thing as anarchy or even minimal gov't spending. It means lowered or restricted spending. It recognizes government as a necessary evil, but aims to control how far its tentacles spread. In some respects, it means simply keeping the status quo (hence, conservatism) rather than continual change.
 
Last edited:
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Bob Gray said:
Fiscal conservatism is a fiction? Uh, yah. The fact that such an accusation would see the light of day again shows just how warped our national sensibilities have become. Blast the person who is, at least in a small way, supporting the reigning in of our fiscal insanity in this country. The fact is, the fiscal nonsense is so ingrained in how our nation functions that it's very hard to extricate yourself from it and still function in our society. But this difficulty is no license to rip anyone who in any way calls out our government and it's serial fiscal irresponsibility. But, unfortunately that's about how it works these days. Shoot the messenger. That'll solve everything. Sometimes I really wonder how much people care about the long term future of this country. :(
Click to expand...

It is a fiction Bob. Not for every single person in the country, but overall spare me. The party that claims the mantle (not individual people, but the whole) spent like crazy when they were in office which was only 4 years ago, and where were all of these so called activists when that was going on? Answer: nowhere to be found. Move beyond that, ask these so called fiscal conservatives if they long for the balanced budgets of the 90's and because that would require giving the lions share of credit to a President from another party they'll try to tell you it was all made up, but then in the next breath support the budget busting tax cuts that came after.

Sorry Bob, but 99% of so called fiscal conservatives are full of $%^&. Elect a Republican next time around and have them borrow money to pass a massive tax cut, and watch their silence over that action even though it goes against their alleged concern over raising the deficit.
 
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Bob Gray said:
And more fun in Arizona. But, hey, we shouldn't want the feds to help us out, should we? :rolleyes:

Pinal County sheriff gets death threats:

http://www.azcentral.com/community/pinal/articles/2010/07/06/20100706pinal-county-sheriff-drug-cartel-threats.html

And the interview the the Pinal County deputy who was shot multiple times by drug runners was released:

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/07/08/20100708arizona-sheriffs-deputy-shootout-interview-released.html

But, hey, us Arizonans are just whiners who want federal pork. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I'm sure no other state police forces are faced with the threat of death every time they go out on patrol.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top