Actually I'm responding with my wallet more than anything. Why in heck should the taxpayers be holding the bag for school, medical, social security and such funds for those who are here illegally? We have enough citizens to support as it is. Hospitals in the southwest are spending a fortune caring for illegals, and they are a substantial burden on the law enforcement establishemnt and prison system as well. Again we have enough costs involved in our own committing crimes so that we don't need to be spending money on folks who shouldn't even be here.
Amen and double ditto!
That's right baby and I'm a CAT 5!
I like the idea of the FairTax that has been promoted by Mike Huckabee, the plan can captue revevue from those that don't pay taxes. Examples of those that w6uld be taxed:
The tax is based on personal consumption.
cave canem...beware of the dog
Richard Halstead (halst001 at yahoo.com)
U.S. Constitution 4th Amendment:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Geneva Convention, Article 13 (Note: Adopted by 2/3 vote of Congress, signed by President and having the full effect of law):
"Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest.
Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.
Measures of reprisal against prisoners of war are prohibited."
...but I'm in general agreement with Bob. I don't think they should all be cuffed and stuffed, I do think the majority of them need to leave and re-enter legally.
Were it up me, I'd take the 4ID along with the federalized National Guard on the border states and deploy them to protect the southern border...we are at war, right? Please don't give me the posse comitatus issue because if we can find a way to do domestic spying and "inhanced" interrogation, posse comitatus is a walk in the park.
In Prince William Country, VA, right after the county passed an law allowing police to check the resident status of those involved in crimes, the average number of children in public school classes fell. I don't have the exact number. To suggest illegals aren't an impact on schools and other social services is to deny reality.
Look, I'm all for people wanting to come to America and make a better life but it should start with following the laws. I'm pretty sure I could make a better life for myself and my family if I walked into a bank and took all the cash they had available but the law says if I do that I end in a 6X10 cell with another guy who keeps wanting to call me Sweetness.
Kind Of Conservative In This Area Regards,
"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anais Nin
That's right baby and I'm a CAT 5!
MR. RUSSERT: The law is very clear that a person is guilty of an offense unless they get a court order before seeking to wiretap an American citizen. Why did the president not get a court order? . . .
SEC'Y RICE: The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, exactly. FISA, which came out of 1978 at a time when the principal concern was, frankly, the activities of people on behalf of foreign governments, rather stable targets, very different from the kind of urgency of detection and thereby protection of a country that is needed today. And so the president has drawn on additional authorities that he has under the Constitution and under other statutes.
General Michael Hayden also spoke out about this same issue. In an appearance at the National press club he said the following
"If FISA worked just as well, why wouldn't I use FISA? To save typing? No. There is an operational impact here, and I have two paths in front of me, both of them lawful, one FISA, one the presidential -- the president's authorization. And we go down this path because our operational judgment is it is much more effective. So we do it for that reason."
Now if you read the statue it is clear how illegal this second path is. The Fisa laws at that time read Section 1809 of FISA, which expressly provides that "[a] person is guilty of an offense if he intentionally - (1) engages in electronic surveillance under color of law except as authorized by statute. . . ." And Section 2511(2)(f) provides that FISA "shall be the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance . . . may be conducted."
Simply put the law says there is no second path for eavesdropping and people using that defense which the Administration clearly did are breaking the law.
There is no authority anywhere that says the President can willfully violate a criminal Law that was passed by Congress. NONE
Waterboarding has been outlawed by the Geneva convention now for years that one I suggest you look up yourself
Last edited by cotts135; 11-11-2008 at 07:23 AM.