Given the country’s mood, the Census Bureau’s request that the federal government suspend immigration raids during the 2010 census seems like a lot to ask. In the past, easing up on enforcement has eased illegal immigrants’ fears about cooperating with census takers. But these days, unfortunately, many Americans would prefer that undocumented residents were deported rather than counted.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Phantom on ACORN stole election?
- CapnAmerica on ACORN stole election?
- CapnAmerica on ACORN stole election?
- CapnAmerica on ACORN stole election?
- janeeyre on Bad timing on mammogram recommendation
- Raptor on Open thread 11/21
- janeeyre on Open thread 11/21
- Regular on Open thread 11/21
- XXX on Open thread 11/21
- Daniel on ACORN stole election?
291 Comments
We don’t need to count them. We know they are here. We see them every day hanging out at the street corner where they hope to get a day job. I feel sorry for these people. To think that they travelled a thousand or more miles to sneak in the USA just to stand on the corner and hope for a manual labour job is something. And what really pisses me off is not the immigrants but the fact tha we were so LIED to about NAFTA and how it was going to “end the illgeal alien problem” because Mexico would soon have a “booming economy” that would keep the Mexicans happily employed at home. Of course, as we now know, Americans gave up millions of our jobs for NAFTA and we got ZERO in return. And the few manual labour jobs we have left in construction and manufacturing usually go to the illegal aliens because the bosses know that they will work for real cheap and not bitch about having no toilet paper in the bathroom or form a union.
Well, they also need to elect people who won’t screw them over in Mexico too. Apparently that can’t be done. They won’t rise up and take out their bad leaders. But who are we to talk on that one.
Count them, hell! Catch them you dummies.
“But these days, unfortunately, many Americans would prefer that undocumented residents were deported rather than counted.”
Rhonda, how in THE hell is that “unfortunate”? That is exactly how the law is written!!!
Again the editorial section of the WE shows it’s bias. Rhonda are you saying the law should NOT apply to them? Hell they are SUPPOSED to be deported, THEY ARE NOT TO BE IN THE UNITED STATES andf working without a VISA, or green card.
And Rhonda is so damn dumb and clueless that it is “unfortunate” that the majority of American Citizens want their laws enforced??? It is “unfortunate” that they majority of Americans want illegal immigration stopped, and that the illegal aliens are cut off from all benefits???
That is “unfortunate” to you Rhonda????
Well it is “Fortunate” for us that you are a third rate editorial writer in a 6th rate newspaper.
Liberal bent, sure enough! ANti AMerican, ovbviously.
Lou, Phillip, Rhonda, Randy, Dave, and Richard should consider that they could easily be replaced with their better educated counterparts in India, China, Japan, etc.
With the exception of printing and delivery of the newspaper, the editorial and writing jobs can and eventually will be done on the cheap by people living in other countries.
“Unfortunate”? … I agree with Tyler’s position. There’s nothing “unfortunate” about what Americans want regarding illegal immigration. Is it too much to ask that NO ONE is excluded from having to obey OUR laws? Why is it that illegals always seem to get a free pass because we should be so “grateful” for them being here?
“But these days, unfortunately, many Americans would prefer that undocumented residents were deported rather than counted.”Posted by Rhonda Holman
Unfortunate choice of words Rhonda.
Undocumented = illegalresidents = Aliens
The proper term Rhonda is Illegal Aliens.
How are you going to count them? You don’t even know who they are, so they will never receive their Census packet.
Good One Kansas!
It is amazing how the people who use language and vocabulary for a daily job do not understand that their choices in words has meaning. IN fact EVERYTHIN illustrates that Rhonda and the WE are illegal alien supporters, and supporters of employers who exploit this labor source simply because it is cheap.
IT is “unfortunate” for our “legal” “resident” “citizens” that we have to put up with such bias put forward as news and the editorial and opinion of the newspaper that is basically a monoploy.
IT is “unfortunate” that these “resident” “editorial writers” have not intelligence, not do they have a grasp of the topic or issue.
This is strictly “talking points from *moveon.org* and the *GOP in espanol* websites. (how is that bor odd bedfellows?)
The majority of Americans and Kansans want illegals gone. Remember we shut down the Senate and Whitehouse phone systems …. TWICE onthe voting days on granting illegal aliens rights. The phones have never wnet down before and they never received as much call volume ever.
Both times it went down to defeat on the pressure of the American Public.
For those of the Democratic Stripe and thos GOPers that illegal immigration ended and the borders secures, and illegal alien criminals deported, Check out Greta Van Sustern’s interview of Newt Gingrich. EXCELLENT bipartisian and PRO AMERICAN points and proposals for 4 laws.
Even did hard Newt haters and those others thqat philosophically disagree with Newt, WILL agree on these four points to end illegal immigration.
It is funny, in that the WE picture shows the sign and the word “Prohibido”.
Even is spanish, it is clear they are not supposed to be here.
Just wait till Dean runs through east central Mexico. How many millions of Mexicans from there will just pack up and move, … here?
The Republicans certainly want them here…that’s why after 6 and half years of Republicans in power, NOTHING has been done!
But these days, unfortunately, many Americans would prefer that undocumented residents were deported rather than counted.Posted by Rhonda Holman
It’s unfortunate your biased newspaper can’t grasp the fact that you are out of touch with the vast majority of Americans on this one.
Stop hiding behind the buzz word “undocumented”. Call it for what they are: CRIMINALS.
Hell YES, we want them rounded up, corralled, and shipped back to Mexico. If you read the news (chuckle), Mexico just did exactly that to the illegal immigrants in that country.
News print is not far from becoming extinct. Your editorialist are not far behind.
The Republicans certainly want them here…that’s why after 6 and half years of Republicans in power, NOTHING has been done!
Posted by: For Christ’s Sake
Could you please tell me the documented position of each of the democratic candidates on immigration? Specifically, have any of them proposed sending them all home?
Thanks
Right after you post the documented position of each Republican in congress and their explanation as to why Bush has failed to deport the millions of illegals here.
Oh, he had to fight daddy’s war in Iraq. I forgot.
I’m a Bush Basher
Oh me oh my
Look “for Christ’s sake” and “God’s sake”, you 2 are idiots. There are factions in BOTH parties that want ilelgal aliens here for cheap labor and for VOTES. DUH!
Trying to lay this at the feet of either party is a waste of time. CONGRESSIONALLY there is a split in the Democratic Party, out in the rest of the country I am of the opinion that the rank and file citizens Dems don’t want them here any more than rank and file GOP citizens.
That being said, it was the leadership of BOTHE Parties in the Senate that put forward that stupid immigration bill TWICE. Harry Reid is as big of an idiot as Lindsey Graham. We have illegal alien supporters on both sides.
Although the “DREAM ACT” has passed with democratic Sponsorship. The “Dream Act” gives illegals some benefits, and allows children of illegals to go to college with help that citizen college goers from other states do not get.
INSTEAD of pointing the fingers at “the other gusy” do what the GOPers did, they gave their party hell, and told their elected idiots to get with the program or pack their damn bags.
BUSH is a traitor in the illegal immigration debate. I no longer support that idiot in chief, and I voted for him twice.
His stance on illegal immigration AND the GOP having Mel Martinez (Co-sponsor of BOTH illegal immigration bills) as the GOP Chairman has turned a lot of “true red” GOPERS away!
WE are sick of leadership in our party raising hell about everything BUT the issues. Such as “loyality oaths” instead of action on illegal immigrations, “loyalty oaths” instead of infrastructure inspection and provision.
The GOP in Kansas needs to give up it’s “Christian Caliphate” dreams and start tackling the problems of the People of the State of Kansas, instead of finding polarizing positions, like Sammy “moonbeam” Brownback.
NOW, let’s see some of you Dems criticize YOUR parties shortcomings on ilelgal immigration!
I am waiting!
Right after you post the documented position of each Republican in congressPosted by: For Christ’s Sake
You posted that republicans did NOTHING to stop illegal immigration. I agree with you.
But I want to know WHICH democrat to vote for POTUS. That is why I am asking their positions.
Otherwise, the next eight years will just be more of the same.
Thanks
Look “for Christ’s sake” and “God’s sake”, you 2 are idiots. There are factions in BOTH parties that want ilelgal aliens here for cheap labor and for VOTES. DUH!
Posted by: Tyler Durden | August 18, 2007 at 09:25 AM
Wow, I have a feeling I’m not in Kansas anymore.
I’m an idiot, for asking the position of candidates running for election?
I didn’t BLAME any party.
You REALLY need to stop jumping to conclusions and stop being so fast to bad mouth.
My question is one all Americans should be asking of ALL their candidates.
I asked about Democrats position only because the poster said it was republicans fault. That indicates he believes democrats have the right answer to resolve this issue. Hence my question on his candidates position.
Thanks
Here’s what the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution has to say about the census:
“2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.”
“Counting the whole number of persons” means exactly that: Everyone gets counted, period, unless they’re Indians (native Americans) not taxed (living on reservations). “Whole persons” makes no distinction between here legally or illegally.
This whole argument is silly. If you don’t want people who are in the country illegally to be counted, change the Constitution.
God’s Sake
Just vote for President Clinton.
She will solve the immigration problem with her rubberstamp Democratic congress.
That is all you need to know.
Question?
If you receive a Census Package (whatever that is) are you not required by law to submit the information?
Hud,
Yes, you are. The Census bureau works with USPS to find every inhabited address in the country; it’s that information that’s used to distribute and collect the packets.
That is all you need to know.
Posted by: For Christ’s Sake
Disregard what I posted above Tyler Durden.
Christ’s Sake is an idiot, and I”m one for having expected him to provide an intelligent answer.
This whole argument is silly. If you don’t want people who are in the country illegally to be counted, change the Constitution.
Posted by: Tom
I didn’t see anyone post against following the constitition.
The Census Bureau can count everyone.
We just want to use the information collected to deport all the illegal criminals in our midst.
Hotdog,
At least four posters on this thread have either suggested or said outright the illegals shouldn’t be counted. The Constitution says everyone gets counted. How hard is that to understand?
“We just want to use the information collected to deport all the illegal criminals in our midst.”
EXACTLY, why do we have to collect the information if we are not going to use it? Additionally the donstitutional issue is for “non taxes” persons were not to be counted and taxed persons were to be counted.
Notibly in the hiring of illegal aliens there is a lot of cash paid, and they do not pay taxes. SO they SHOULD NOT be counted in accordance with the constitution!
It is “unfortunate” that these “undocuemnted residents” are not paying their share of taxes but using services for which legal residents whom are “documented” have to pay for.
Tyler,
The Constitution specifies “Indians not taxed,” not “illegal immigrants not taxed.”
Again, if you don’t like the way the Census is conducted, change the US Constitution.
Good luck with that. Let me know how that works out for you.
“”Counting the whole number of persons” means exactly that: Everyone gets counted, period, unless they’re Indians (native Americans) not taxed (living on reservations). “Whole persons” makes no distinction between here legally or illegally.”
That is according to you TOM,, and I would bet you are NOT an immigration, constitutional, or census, or redistricting attorney!
The laws clearly shows that the interpertation is for “documented persons” as “illegal aliens” are not supposed to be here anyway. They have no legal jursdiction, they have no legal rights granted under the constitution.
Just because TOM SAYS so does not make it so.
You are a loser of a poster, and IF you are so fired up about illegal aliens, YOU TAKE CARE of them Pay for them, and go to the funerals of all the americans killed by illegal aliens.
You anti American piece of crap!
Shut up TOM
Shut up Tom
How hard is that to understand?
Posted by: Tom
I thought I was pretty clear.
Count em all. We need the detailed information in our sweep to pick them all up and deport them.
I don’t have any issue with the constitution requiring all human beings be counted. Apparently, you are right, others don’t even want them counted.
But that is silly. We need to count em to get rid of them.
Let’s get counting. The sooner we know who and where they are, the easier it will be for our beefed up INS to go and get em.
Hotdog,
The Census is done anonymously so as to get the greatest amount of compliance possible. There’s no mechanism in the Census that’s at all helpful in determining which respondents are here illegally, and which aren’t.
What do you propose? That there be a question on the Census forms that says “Tell us the names of your family members who are here illegally”? How many honest answers do you think you’ll get? And that’s not a question you can force people to answer – the Constitutional right to silence applies to everyone subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, not just citizens.
they have no legal rights granted under the constitution.Posted by: Tyler Durden | August 18, 2007 at 10:36 AM
Actually, you’re wrong, Tyler. Again, from our 14th Amendment:
“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Perhaps you should try reading the US Constitution, and maybe some history books as well. They’ll help you understand the context of the Constitution, and of its 27 amendments.
I find it utterly amazing that Republicans will strike such a hard line against a process of legalization for illegals, knowing that BUSINESSES will suffer the hardest hits because of their hiring these people at low wages…..
BUT they wouldn’t raise the minimum wage for legal US citizens because it would hurt BUSINESSES.
Go ahead, take a hard line on illegal immigrants and having them deported.
Then figure out what you are going to do with their LEGAL children, now orphaned (taxes!!!) and the businesses that will need handouts to survive (taxes!!!)
LEGALLY, illegal aliens are to report immediately and let us know they are in the country, to corss the border illegally is a $5000 civil crime, not reporting that you are in the country is another $5000 crime that is a FELONY!
Fine, the constitutions ays COUNT all people, AND ALL must respond to the count by law, then SO DO THE ILLEGAL ALIENS. Let’s count them, find them, and get rid of them.
I am upset about the “redistricting” that will occur based on census data. Remember about the reason WHY census is taken, it is to set the congressional districts. California gained something like 34 seats in congress, and PA, and others LOST Seats because California counts all their illegals.
How do we know the illegals have been counted once or twice, or three times???
So TOM, you are eroding Kansas congressional representation by supporting illegal alien counting.
Thanks, and it still stands, YOU ARE ANTI AMERICAN!
Speaking of the United States Constitution:
On this day in 1920, the 19th Amendment guaranteeing the vote to _women_ was ratified.
Congratulations, women of America!
Again TOM you are not a constitutional attorney. You are some yahoo typping a post on a blog. NOT AN EXPERT IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.
So DO NOT act as if just because you typed it it is gospel.
You are a moron that can type.
Big Deal.
“…nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Non citizens are not under the Jurisdiction of some laws.
Tyler,
Tell me what “any person” means.
Thanks.
What Tom’s ideology shows and encourages is to count illegal aliens to increase representational apportionment in regards to a lot of things.
- Number of Representatives to Congress
- Number of Electoral Votes
- Amount of Federal Funds to a State
- Subsidizing in General the inclusion of Illegal Aliens with Rights and Privileges of a citizen of the U.S.
Of course, who gets penalized for it are those citizens in states where the illegal alien population is lower.
This also points out the agenda of the Democratic Party to win by “Hook or Crook” national elections with dishonest representations.
There have been several proposed amendments by Congressional Representatives to change residents to citizens.
My temporary solution for the 2010 Census?
Have border patrol and Immigration agents step up raids 100 fold in 2010.
Have every American Citizen who cares about protecting the sovereignty of the United States, report, take photos and generally document any instance of illegal Alien activity.
Pressure Congress to take away from States, funds, electoral votes and any thing benefited from an illegal count of illegal aliens.
Make the Democratic Party suffer with so much bad press about this, they will be able to stick their own heads out the door.
er “won’t be able to stick their own heads out the door.”
gotta run – grocery shopping time..
(blink)
For the peolpe who throw out the “Anti-American” charge–
Does being pro-American mean embracing the status quo whole-heartedly, believing that this country’s policies and government are perfect as written, and that you are absolutely peachy with every part of it?
…because that charge only seems to come out when someone suggests soemthing that represents a change in policy.
Maybe “Anti-American” just means changes YOU DON’T LIKE, and nothing more.
Yeah, troll, my horrible “ideology” is to insist that the Constitution be followed in the making and enforcing of the laws of this nation.
I guess that makes me anti-American.
:::huuuuuge effin’ eyeroll:::
How is being “pro other country’s citizens” at the expense of American Citizens who foot the bill NOT Anti American?
DUH!
You guys supporting illegal aliens at all costs are just plain stupid and ANti American!
You are rooting against American Citizens in favor of other countr’s citizens.
YOu expect all of us to give up rights and taxes and give to the non American illegal aliens>
BTW, TOM, an Alien is not a under legal jursdictions, as they are not supposed to be here anywhy.
That is like an illegal aliens crossing the border and having an “anchor baby”. Some say that the 14th amendment applies. IT doesn’t, that person is here ilelgally and Not under the “jurisdiction”, therefore not citizenship for the “anchor baby”.
That there be a question on the Census forms that says “Tell us the names of your family members who are here illegally”? Tom
Do you propose illegal criminals LIE on their census forms?
http://www.census.gov/Data are provided on:
Population HousingAncestryDisabilityGrandparents as caregiversIncome in 1999Labor force statusLanguage spoken at home and ability to speak EnglishMarital status**Migration (residence in 1995)Occupation, industry, and class of worker**Place of birth, citizenship, and year of entryPlace of work and journey to workSchool enrollment and educational attainmentVeteran statusWork status in 1999
No TOM you are not a “Champion of the Constitution” that you visualize yourself. YOu are hiding behind it, and loosley inperperting it narrowly to support you pro ilegal immigration viewpoint.
You are also interperting it incorrectly as well. YOU are the clueless trollie here TOmmy boy!
“**Migration (residence in 1995)Occupation, industry, and class of worker**Place of birth, citizenship, and year of entry”
THANK YOU EAGLE!!!!
I thought it was illegal to ask for proof of citizenship or legal status!!!!! But the Census bureau can do it??? I guess that meas it is perfectly legal to ask for proof and status of citizenship and residency!!!!!!
BTW, *Migration* is legally. Illegally crossing the border is NOT migration in the legal definitions!!!
Tyler,
It’s pretty clear you have no idea what you’re talking about. You don’t know what ‘any person’ means, you are unclear on the definition of the term ‘jurisdiction,’ and you haven’t bothered to read and work to understand the US Constitution.
All you have are insults for anyone with the audacity to disagree with you and your stunning displays of ignorance.
SAMPLE 2000 US CENSUS FORMhttp://www.census.gov/dmd/www/pdf/d-61b.pdf
Now the idiotic debate about was or wasn’t on the form can stop.
Now, one question, in the category of RACE, can anyone DEFINE race?
I think National Origin and/or Color would be more appropriate.
Unless someone can define RACE.
And if you can’t define race, what were the Race riots of the 1960’s all about?
Eagle Beak,
“**Place of birth, citizenship, and year of entry” is not the same question as “Are you or your family members here illegally?” A person can be a citizen of another country, yet here legally.
Not so quick Tyler. Tom may make the point that by LAW the US Census Bureau canNOT reveal the data to any other federal agency.
Question #13 on the official US Census form is:
“Is this person a Citizen of the United States?”
http://www.census.gov/dmd/www/pdf/d02p.pdf
Illegals, how will you answer?
Eagle Beak,
I think you made my point for me :)
Illegals, how will you answer?Posted by: Eagle Beak | August 18, 2007 at 11:18 AM
It’s not a valid question for the Census. Here’s why:
“Amendment 5 – Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
(ps: Note the use of “any person,” not “citizens only”)
Anytime I can help Tom.
;-)
Awwwwwwwwwwh Come Onnnnnnn Tom!!!
It’s on the darn form we all completed in the last census.
And you want to argue the constitution with the blog?
Like the movie says,
It’s a fact Jack!
So I ask you, should those illegal, criminal, and false documented foreigners LIE on the census form?
Eagle Beak,
I just looked at Max’s link (thanks, Max). “Are you an illegal alien” is not a question on the form.
It asks if you’re a citizen. Non-citizens can be here _legally._
And this _IS_ a Constitutional question, because the Constitution says who gets counted, and it says whether or not those people being counted must incriminate themselves.
“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, ***or in the Militia,***”
Thanbk YOU TOM!!! We can form militia and deny peoples (illegal alien) “rights”. IF we form a militia! Says so right there in your post. Hell we could probably suspend habeous corpus too!!
That is the answer A “militia” that can be armed!
Seems as if the Minutemen have it right, as well as the Arizona, Texas, New Mexico, and California militias that were formed to address illegal immigration.
You know Tom, I just lost any respect I had for you.
I cannot believe after you are shown in black and white, on the actual census form, question #13 asks if you are a US Citizen,
you still won’t just admit you are probably wrong.
I even GAVE you another avenue to argue your point – and you didn’t take advantage of that. (although I was ready) Please don’t progress to saying it’s O.K. for illegals to “falsify” an official government mandatory document.
Come on Tom, say “oops” and move on.
There were long and short form versions in 2000.
What will be on the 2010 form is the relevent question to ask now though.
What is race?What is race? (No clear scientific definition of this)
How about color, colors, region of origin, nation(s) of origin, sexual orientation, etc….?
(How many queers are there? The queers don’t want to risk confirmation of their minority status – likely 2% so they will object to this question!)
Immigration status? Legal, not?
Eagle Beak,
An illegal alien can answer “NO” to question 13 and still complete the form honestly. I’ve already SAID that.
Question 13 DOES NOT ASK about legal or illegal status. Non-citizens can answer that question “NO” and be here legally.
I don’t know what point you’re trying to make.
inflated opinion of his intellect and comprehension of the Constitution.
Even though he is wrong on all accounts applying to illegal aliens, and the majority of American Citizens that disagree with his view VEHEMENTLY, he still believes he is correct.
A legend ONLY in HIS mind!
Doesn’t matter.
Lie on the census form and break a law.
Tell the truth on the form, and confess to breaking an illegal immigration law, either way Government doesn’t enforce the law.
As I posted some time ago, let the Census Bureau count them. And hopefully the illegals will honestly complete the form.
Our government needs to know this information. It would be nice if they knew how many were here now, wouldn’t it? Help in the debate and decisions congress is making based upon guesstimates. Costs could be further evaluated and better decisions could be made.
Then, we use the census information, hopefully in the dark of night, to go out and round these critters up. Drop them off whereever they came from as soon as possible. Which is what Mexico JUST did with THEIR illegals.
Max,
Look at Person 2, Question 2 on the Census form you posted the link to. You’ll see that gay and lesbian couples are indeed being counted (you know, those people you so kindly referred to as “queers.”)
In fact, the 2000 Census showed that there are gay and lesbian couples in every county in the state of Kansas, even the least populous, most remote areas of the state.
Max and Hotdog,
How many times must I post that the Census form does NOT ask about a non-citizens legal status in the United States? THE QUESTION IS NOT THERE.
********Question 13: Is this person a CITIZEN of the United States?
Yes, born in the United States ? Skip to 15a
Yes, born in Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands,or Northern Marianas
Yes, born abroad of American parent or parents
Yes, a U.S. citizen by naturalization
No, not a citizen of the United States********
Note the absence of “Are you an illegal alien?” from the list?
Tom, I know 2 queers who call themselves queer, and do so proudly mind you.
Is that bad slang? Don’t know, but they use it proudly to describe themselves.
What is race though?
Color is sometimes easy to determine, but there are many shades.
National origin is sometimes easy, but many are mutts.
Region or more clearly perhaps – Continent is sometimes easy to know, but again mixed breeds become common.
I’m a mutt myself.
And how many times must I post, that the only relevent debate is about the future. Who can change the past? And how good is 7 year old data?
The next census is 2010. What’s on this form?
Analysis of the completed form in total can provide the INS with a rich treasure of information to deploy the resources needed to make the final determination and arrest.
Coupled with the national workers registry, the social security administration data, and state license data – the hunt can begin.
Now if only the feds and states would strictly enforce laws against employers who hire illegals, we’d be in business.
Border security would finish it off.
#1. Keep new illegals from coming in.#2. Cut off employment#3. Round up the critters already here and deport them.
Only then would I be willing to talk about immigration (legal).
The Dream Act does not give anything to illegal immigrants that takes away from US citizens. All it does is allow children (who were brought here by their parents illlegally — not the kids’ fault) who have grown up here and attended US schools for a *minimum* of 5 years and graduated from a US highschool to qualify for in-state tuition at a state college in the state in which they have resided, and I think it also provides a way for them to legalize their status (no way exists now).
The school doesn’t lose any money — the vast majority of those kids wouldn’t go to college at all without the Act, so the schools actually get more money this way than they otherwise would. US citizens can get in-state tuition in the state they have resided in, so they aren’t losing anything either. Nobody is paying the kids’ tuition for them. The kids are here, and the vast majority of them are thoroughly Americanized. It is better for our society if these kids — most of whom don’t even remember their parents’ home country and have a lot to offer — are able to better themselves and their families (and in the process pay higher taxes) instead of remaining in the shadows in poverty or near poverty.
The Census laws are specific: no one connected to the Census can use any information gained through census-taking to take any action other than collecting the stats. The law reads that way so we can have the most assurance possible that we will have an accurate count, which is necessary in order to know how to best use our resources in building schools, where more fire and police stations are needed, etc. Technically, census workers cannot even report child abuse if they happen to see it happening in the course of their census-taking (though most would for moral reasons; they would also likely get fired).
US citizens can get in-state tuition in the state they have resided in, so they aren’t losing anything either. Nobody is paying the kids’ tuition for them.
That is an advantage to US Citizen American children from other states having to pay OUT of State tuition.
Yes, once approved for college, the illegal and criminal child can qualify for loans and grants.They are therefore taking funds which would be available to US Citizen children.
Further, the college’s operating expense is based upon student population. Some federal funds and state education funds are based upon enrollment numbers. Illegals increase the funding requirement for both.
So legal parents, paying college tuition for their own US Citizen children, are subsidizing the illegal criminal variety. As are all taxpayers.
I don’t want taxpayer money used to assist ANY illegal behavior.
JJ, if you think our government does not use the Census Bureau, or ANY other agencies “protected” information (e.g. social security administration, IRS) to support the governments aims – you are being naive.
Bush is all over survellience by any means. You think the law will stop him?
Further, it is just a matter of time before someone taps into this treasure of information. Laws can and sometimes should be changed. Particularly to stop criminal activity. Like a court order.
Order up!
So to those of you who favor “undocumented aliens” and their constitutional rights:What would you do if someone broke into your home, raided your fridge, plopped themselves in front of your TV, used your phone and invited all their friends and neighbors to come to your house where they broke your stuff, ate all your food and generally treated you like dirt.
Then they told you that it’s OK it was their house first, and just because they went bankrupt and lost the house to the bank, doesn’t mean they don’t still own it. But you can stay as long as you keep working, foot the bills and do the up keep.
If this does not sound familiar it should. We are under siege people and it’s time to get serious. Find them, deport them, close the borders and arm the militia. Either protect what you have or it will be taken from you. That my fellow Americans is a fact.
#3. Round up the critters already here and deport them.Posted by: Hotdog1 | August 18, 2007 at 12:11 PM
“Critters?”
What a nice way to refer to fellow human beings.
You think the law will stop him?Posted by: Eagle Beak | August 18, 2007 at 12:28 PM
Eagle Beak,
Again, you’ve made my point for me. This Administration has proven that the United States Constitution, and the laws of the United States, are no impediment to committing any acts this President desires.
The most frightening thing is the huge number of so-called “conservatives” who are still cheering him on. The very people who should know better are letting this President gather more power into the White House than any of his predecessors. Do any of you understand how dangerous this is?
No Tom the most frightening thing here are those posting support for ilelgal aliens and taking all the rights from the Citizen children of the future.
Americans selling each other out.
That is the most frightening thing.
By the way, if you want free medical care, become a Mexican citizen, come into the U.S. illegally and just go to the nearest emergency room for absolutely free medical care.
Tyler,
The “support” I’ve posted is for the Constitution of the United States of America. The Constitution says that _all_persons_ get equal protection of the laws, whether you believe they have committed crimes or not.
Why is that so difficult for you to understand?
Except for the fact that he Constitution starts out with the words,
“We the People of the United States”
And “We the People” have agreed to provide equal protection to _ALL PERSONS_.
Wow.
From Random House Unabridged:
all adj.1. the whole of (used in referring to quantity, extent, or duration) : all the cake; all the way; all year.2. the whole number of (used in referring to individuals or particulars, taken collectively) : all students.3. the greatest possible (used in referring to quality or degree) : with all due respect; with all speed.4. every: all kinds; all sorts.5. any; any whatever: beyond all doubt.
per•son n.1. a human being, whether man, woman, or child: The table seats four persons.2. a human being as distinguished from an animal or a thing. 3. Sociol. an individual human being, esp. with reference to his or her social relationships and behavioral patterns as conditioned by the culture.4. Philos. a self-conscious or rational being.5. the actual self or individual personality of a human being: You ought not to generalize, but to consider the person you are dealing with.6. the body of a living human being,
Buzzzzzzzz!
It’s WE the People of the United States.
Tom blather on all you want, you are no “champion of the constitution”. Only in your beer soaked brain is that true. Kansas that would be the Declaration of Independence, but it is We the People of the USA, not we the people that come from everywhere else illegally and we the people of Mexico.
NEWS FLASH.
They found another of the suspects in the Newark, NJ execution deaths of 3 AMERICAN CITIZENS!!! He was found 200 miles to the south in Maryland. ICE also picked up 12 illelgal aliens in tha housing apartment where the suspect was arrested!!
THIS IS GOOD NEWS!!!
Troll,
Go make that case in court somewhere.
Good luck with that.
TOM wwe do not use a dictionary in court! We used the legal difinitions spelled out and defined on exactly WHAT those words mean in application to the particular law.
As in legally a “person” in State law also includes businesses or corporations is specific laws.
You just unzipped your mental fly and let everyone know you are a general idiot using wandering generalities and rationalizations to support your weak assed arguments.
You would need to look up in the constitutional law books for what and how a person is definde within scoep of that law.
Your using a random house dictionary shows just how much of a simpleton you are and how you have no understanding of law or legal arguments.
Say g’night gracie!
Such ignorance.
Look back in history, and you will see that this nation has a history of hating whatever group was new to this nation.
Ben Franklin himself was concerned by the fact that so much buisness was being done in German in Philly in the 1700’s. His argument echo exactly the arguments made by you people now. Humorous. It’s amazing how you don’t have a sub population of people who speak german now. That’s because they all integrated.
You could dig ditches full of flesh eating guppies, you could install laser turrets, you could have disentagrater beams on the border, people would still find ways of getting here.
Why? Because America offers something not present in Mexico. Hope. If any of you ignorant piles of crap were stuck in that country with no hope of getting ahead, knowing that it could take up to twenty years to get into this country what would you do? Add to that starving children, ect, ect.
We are so damn comfortable and arrogant in this country, confident that this nation was God’s gift to us, and we have the right to refuse it to anyone else. We forget that we took it from others, indeed we were all illegal immigrants, that destroyed a culture.
Tom is a mental lightweight!
Shut up JB! If they all come here this country will be a piece of shit just like they are turning Southern California into, and all the way east to Laredo on the southern border. Look at all the places these illegal aliens congregate. You do not have it too bad in Kansas currently, but keep up with your stupid generalities you will soon be hip deep in illegal aliens.
“Shut up JB!”
Talk about a mental lightweight. Good comeback, buddy.
Keep it up the gloom and doom, dont’ take issue with any of the arguments that I made. Typical ignoramus.
It doesn’t make a difference how bad it gets in another country, that is tough. It is theirs to make something of. Laying this at the feet of your fellow citizens and excusing illegal behavior and direct disdain for our laws is no way to preserve the nation, and certianly is the path of least resistance, will erode liberties by ignoring laws.
Read the rest dumbass, you only go for the cherry picked arguments.
Lightweight!
Just shows what this all comes back to- racism. You think anywhere there are Mexicans, this world will turn to crap.
Who are “we the people”
Did that include the thousands upon thousands in the western territories granted to us by Britian, that were still considered their own by natives?
Did that include the thousands who came to Kansas in the 1800’s and started homesteading in land that was federally set aside for Indians. If your family has been in kansas for more than a hundred years, there is a good chance that you have benifited directly from illegal immigration.
Do your research, people. When Wichita was founded, the settlers were ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS! But since they had already started their lives here, and had things going the Federal government GAVE THEM AMNESTY, and allowed them to stay here. Instead they just kicked out all the Indians.
Wichita was founded by illegal immigrants.
Back to race again.
What is race?
Yo jb, you are embarrassing yourself.
The western territories granted to us by the British? Please, name the states please in those areas that were part of the Constitutional convention.
Kansas in the 1800s? Come on now jb, the U.S. Constitution had been written for three decades by then.
Get with some logical argument or better yet learn history.
Ask tyler. He’s the one that seems to think that Mexicans are going to destroy our society.
jb, you are some piece of work.
Wichita as a city didn’t exist until the latter half of the 19th century.
Kansas didn’t become a State until 1861.
Where did this guy jb come from?
And is he the same one that was always sleeping in History class?
Think carefully, Kansas. Two different arguments.
“The western territories granted to us by the British? Please, name the states please in those areas that were part of the Constitutional convention.”
The northwest territory: ie, illinois, ohio, that area. They were given to us by Britain, after the war, even though most of the Indians had been british sympathisers and supported the British.
“Kansas in the 1800s? Come on now jb, the U.S. Constitution had been written for three decades by then.”
Kansas was made a state in the 1850’s much more than three decades, smart one. This is a seperate arugument than the one above. Read a little bit of Craig Miner, Wichita historian. When the settlers came to the Wichita area in the late 1860’s this is Indian territory.
jb,
You are still embarrassing yourself. Your dates are wrong, your facts are incorrect used.
I don’t think you want to get in a discussion about history with me. I’m a history buff. :)
Sorry, 1860’s, not 1850’s, my mistake.
Maybe Mexico needed a regime change more than Iraq?
Bring it. I’ve read about every Kansas history book out there.
Wichita was incorporated in 1871, and first settled after the civil war. An abortive attempt was made before the war, for obvious reasons didn’t go through. Read a little man, when Wichita was founded this was Indian territory.
I guess nobody notice the Spanish newspaper being sold right next to the Eagle.My guess is that it is being published by the Eagle.Does anybody know the answer to that one?
I gave you answers to your arguments. Are you to unable to respond to them?
No jb, your ignorance on the interpretation of history is just too sad. I’ll save you the embarrassment.
The weak statement of someone who has no response.
I gave you your answers. Northwest Territory, read up on it. Read about Wichita history the books are available in the downtown library.
According to the 2000 US Census Form, your RACE must be one of the following?
What is this person’s race? Mark one ormore races to indicate what this person considershimself/herself to be.
White (That’s a color)
Black, African Am., or Negro(That’s a color, continent of origin, or bad slang word.)
American Indian or Alaska Native (That’s a continental origin) — Print nameof enrolled or principal tribe.
Asian Indian (National/Continental origin)Chinese (National origin)Filipino (National origin)Japanese (National origin)Korean (National origin)Vietnamese (National origin)Other Asian — (Continental origin) Print race.
Native Hawaiian (National origin)Guamanian orChamorroSamoanOther PacificIslander (National origin)—Print race.
Other Asian (Continental origin)— Print race.
Some other race (Who knows?) — Print race.
http://www.census.gov/dmd/www/pdf/d-61b.pdf
You argue too much like Chas, jb.
You’ll go off on a tangent and forget what you write two posts ago.
Then when you are losing the argument, you’ll change the subject.
Sorry, I don’t argue with people who cannot admit they are wrong about basic facts.
Can you honestly argue that this wasn’t indian territory when we settled it?
You would have made an aweful high school debater, Kansas. Still to response to my arguments. Only personal attacks.
So what is race?
Some combination of color, slang name, national origin, and continental origin.
No biological basis for race.
So who care?
Well, the government does.
The Government needs to name us and put us into some category for some reason.
Why is it any of their business?
And besides, I thought we were all AMERICANS. (some legal, some not of course)
“no response”not “to response.”I am the worst typist in the world
Bottom line here – there is NO reason to suspend deportations during the Census.
Illegal aliens are, by their very nature, liars and criminals already. To assume they will suddenly come clean when presented with a few months of no deportation is ludicrous.
Actually Max, the latest Anthropology arguments about what Race is changing.
Because of adaptation, the prevailing theory is that race doesn’t really exist as it is currently defined. I would have to dig it out, but it’s an odd theory that turns race definition upside down.
Worth a look though if you have time.
I’ll help you out since your my buddy, Kansas.
“Wichita, the Early Years”Craig Miner. Avaiable at the down town library.
Were they or were they not illegal immigrants when they first settled the Wichita area?
jb, the point is, that I don’t what to spam up the forum on an argument between you and me about history.
It is way off the subject of the thread and irrelevant to the thread topic.
No, I think you know that is not the point.
This is not way off subject, it gives legal prescedent for amnesty. Why would we get to have amnesty, but not mexican immigrants?
BTW, I knew Professor Miner and we have talked. :)
Then I am highly jeolous. My wife had a class with him, and I kept telling her to get his autograph for me…
Ya, well, I’m a history nerd.
The Constitution says that the number of persons (free counted as 1, non-taxing paying Indian not counted, non-free counted as 3/5).
So other than names and addresses, why does the government need any more information from the Census?
From Article 1 Section 2 of the US Constitution:
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several Stateswhich may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers,which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons,including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians nottaxed, three fifths of all other Persons.
The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meetingof the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of tenYears, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.
The typical person who crosses our border illegally is a Mexican who cannot survive where he is. Current law does not provide a realistic way for them to come here legally. If a Mexican were a citizen of some other country, he would qualify, but our laws currently unreasonably restrict Mexicans, giving them the same quota allotment as Nepal. If they had a legal way to come here, I’d probably feel a heck of lot less sorry for them, but they don’t.
If you want to make an analogy of breaking into your house, it would be a more realistic analogy to put it this way:
If you spread a delicious Thanksgiving Dinner out, leave your doors and windows open so all the neighborhood can see and smell your food, invite some of the neighbors down the street to share, but ignore your nextdoor neighbor who hasn’t eaten in days, should you really be surprised if he tries to hide under your table to catch what scraps he can? That is a more realistic analogy. No, he shouldn’t walk into our house uninvited (even if we did leave the door wide open) nor hide under our table, but if he can see and smell our table full of food and he hasn’t eaten in days, that is a very powerful temptation that not many of *us* would be able to resist either.
For those that like the Bible, even Proverbs 6:30 says that no one despises a thief who steals in order to satisfy his hunger when he is starving.
20% of Mexicans cannot afford to eat properly, and 43% (in some areas it is 85%) of its children are in poverty much worse than anything we see here. We may think that’s “not our problem” but since we share a border, what happens there does affect us whether we like it or not. It would be in *our* national interests to help Mexico become the sort of place most of its citizens could live decent lives, while at the same time enforcing laws against employers who hire illegal immigrants. Increasing the number allotted to Mexicans to enter legally to a reasonable number would help us also.
The “illegal behavior” everyone talks about is not in the same category as drug dealing, murder, rape and terrorism, but you’d sure think so to hear some of us talk. Instead, it is crossing a border without authorization in order to feed your kids, even though you’d rather do so legally if that option were open to you. How is that vile behavior?
I used to live in Texas, so I know what it’s like to be around a lot of Hispanics (both legal and illegal). They are not the enemy; they are actually good people who have a lot of good to offer our nation and our society.
No, we can’t just let in everyone who wants to come, but my goodness, show some compassion for hurting people who are just trying to survive. They aren’t trying to hurt anyone. They are people not unlike us who do not deserve the level of hatred and demonization being leveled against them here and in the media.
JJ,
Travel in Europe a bit and see how far you get without documentation.
Our standards in the U.S. should be no different.
Illegal Aliens are in the United States Illegally.
No one said the Mexican people are bad in this forum.
At the same time, they become bad when they enter our country illegally.
You know, against the law?
We are a nations of laws and don’t appreciate people breaking our laws.
*sigh*
Same legalistic argument.
Still no real substance.
jb, what is non-substantive about obeying the laws of a country?
I guess nobody notice the Spanish newspaper being sold right next the Eagle.My guess is that it is being published by the Eagle.Does anybody know the answer to that one?
Gotta go…
I would like to say that I enjoyed the intellegant debate over this issue…..
To much to ask I suppose.
Oh well….
ARRRRRRRGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Because laws like these change and shift and flow according to the needs of our times! That’s what I was trying to say by bringing in the historical argument.
Here you go Wiseman,
What I could find on Wichita Hispanic Newspapers.
“Tiempos publisher Wintilio Ortiz has found that covering the local news for Hispanic readers in Wichita also means covering the local news in the Mexican towns of Guadalupe Victoria, Durango and Miguel Auza, Zacatecas.
A large majority of Mexican immigrants living in Wichita come from those two Mexican states, Ortiz said, and they want to keep up with the local happenings back home as well as in Wichita.
So Ortiz hired correspondents in those Mexican towns to cover the local news there, and he buses 400 copies of the Wichita-based newspaper to the towns so relatives back home can keep up with their families in Kansas.”
http://www.hispanictips.com/2006/10/24/newspaper-bridges-mexican-border-kansas-immigrants/
Mi Gente Hoy — or My People Today — is the product of Wintilio Ortiz, the 29-year-old owner of Rosas & Rose’s, a flower shop at 29th and Arkansas.
Ortiz says he’s quickly running out of the 5,000 copies printed of the November issue.
The native of Guadalajara, Mexico, who moved to Wichita in 1989, sees business and social opportunities arising from the magazine.
As the Hispanic population grows, there’s a bigger market for Hispanic and non-Hispanic advertisers to reach, Ortiz says. And the magazine is a vehicle, he says, to bring all members of the local Hispanic community together.
“I think we don’t know each other,” says Ortiz of the area’s Hispanic community that comprises people from countries such as Argentina, Colombia, Guatemala, Mexico and Puerto Rico.http://wichita.bizjournals.com/wichita/stories/2000/11/06/story5.html
jb,
Being an illegal alien hasn’t changed.
I remember as a boy going to the Post Office and see those posters on the wall giving warning to Illegal Aliens about how they must register in the United States in order to be able to stay here.
Sounds like that was a good policy back then, Kansas. Register them and get them to start paying taxes.
Oh wait… that might be considered Amnesty.
Will two copies of the U.S. Census form be sent to all? One in English, the other in Spanish?
“The “illegal behavior” everyone talks about is not in the same category as drug dealing, murder, rape and terrorism,” JJ
Interesting approach to the rule of law JJ. You stating your opinion that some laws are meant to be broken and it is O.K. I guess you are the JUDGE and JURY on which laws our nation should not enforce. Personally, I think rape is a minor violation. Let’s let em all go free. Make sense to you? It should that is your rationale.
Dog
“I used to live in Texas, so I know what it’s like to be around a lot of Hispanics (both legal and illegal). They are not the enemy. ” JJ
I never said they, Hispanics were the enemy. Any person who crosses our border and enters our nation ILLEGALLY, is a criminal. I am an equal opportunity law enforcer. Arrest them regardless of race, creed, color, sex, or religion.Deport them after they pay for any illegal activity: forged documents/identity theft/SSN’s.
They are all critters to me.
If I’m correct, and I may not be, immigration requirments didn’t start until the early 1900’s. I’d have to double check on that, though.
I’m still a little dissapointed that no one can argue the fact that the Wichita area was founded by illegal immigrants.
Aliens and Nationality
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr;sid=2f70098f8103c455f6d533e952e9656d;rgn=div5;view=text;node=8%3A1.0.1.2.34;idno=8;cc=ecfr
The infamous 287b removal is known by most all Law Enforcement Officers and I quote that part of the lengthy law below. You can read the law in detail at the above URL.
“When, in accordance with section 241(c)(3) of the Act, a transportation line is responsible for the expenses of an inadmissible or deportable alien’s removal, and the alien requires special care and attention, the alien shall be delivered to the owner, agent, master, commanding officer, person in charge, purser, or consignee of the vessel or aircraft on which the alien will be removed, who shall be given Forms I–287, I–287A, and I–287B. The reverse of Form I–287A shall be signed by the officer of the vessel or aircraft to whom the alien has been delivered and immediately returned to the immigration officer effecting delivery. Form I–287B shall be retained by the receiving officer and subsequently filled out by the agents or persons therein designated and returned by mail to the district director named on the form. The transportation line shall at its own expense forward the alien from the foreign port of disembarkation to the final destination specified on Form I–287. The special care and attention shall be continued to such final destination, except when the foreign public officers decline to allow such attendant to proceed and they take charge of the alien, in which case this fact shall be recorded by the transportation line on the reverse of Form I–287B. If the transportation line fails, refuses, or neglects to provide the necessary special care and attention or comply with the directions of Form I–287, the district director shall thereafter and without notice employ suitable persons, at the expense of the transportation line, and effect such removal.”
I’m still a little dissapointed that no one can argue the fact that the Wichita area was founded by illegal immigrants.
Posted by: jb | August 18, 2007 at 02:26 PM
Because jb, your argument is ridiculous and without merit.
Kansas at the time was not a state or even a territory.
The definition of illegal immigrant did not exist in the area known as Wichita now, because there was no Wichita or no Kansas.
No one is going to discuss your ridiculous argument.
Wrong, Kansas became a territory in 1854. Wichita was settled in the 1860’s.
Come on, Mr. History Buff. There was a Kansas, and this was land that was federally sat aside for Indian reservation. People moved onto it illegally. Hence illegal immigration.
Ok JB, just let everyone come to the US.
Sure, no problem.
Keep looking for your precedents, btw, as if that justifies repeating the same mistakes made in the past.
We need to do the right thing going forward. And Amnesty is saying it is OK to break American laws.
We could all have fun picking and choosing which laws to break!
We are a nation of laws — that was founded upon overthrowing an entire government, not just breaking one or two laws. Read our Declaration of Independence. It is basically an explanation to the world as to why it was not morally wrong to overthrow a legal government.
Everyone agrees that we should all obey the law in normal circumstances, and even when it causes us a lot of inconvenience. I think everyone also agrees that there are times when it is morally right to not obey the law when that law is unjust. Slavery, civil rights, that sort of thing. (Would anyone nowadays actually argue that abolitionists who broke the law by hiding and helping slaves to freedom are “liars and criminals who won’t start obeying the law” if those laws against slavery are changed?) The question is, how do we decide when it is appropriate to break a given law? People will have different convictions about this, of course, but to just say “we are a nation of laws” not only ignores history and how our very country was founded, but also many great moral and civil advancements.
Most people who are so up in arms against comprehensive immigraton reform have never had to deal with immigration law and know virtually nothing about it. Many parts of current immigration law are not fair, just or even logical.
And BTW, I have traveled internationally to Europe and Asia, as well as to Mexico. I have also had to deal with immigration (even though I am a pasty white US citizen by birth) because of friends and loved ones. I also think it is extremely important to follow the law. But “legal” and “moral” are not necessarily the same thing, and we should not forget that.
Okay, Max, don’t let anyone else come into the United States. Now that we broke the law to take this land, it’s okay. We’ll start following rules as soon as we get what we want. Screw everybody else.
LOOK OUT AMERICA! NEW SHORT CENSUS FORM IS ON THE WAY IN 2010!
It won’t help catch illegals at all!
http://www.census.gov/2010census/about_2010_census/007622.html
2010 Census is Different
The Census Bureau has changed the way it conducts the national count.
Goodbye Long Form
In the past, most households received a short-form questionnaire, while one household in six received a long form that contained additional questions and provided more detailed socioeconomic information about the population.
The 2010 Census will be a short-form only census and will count all residents living in the United States as well as ask for name, sex, age, date of birth, race, ethnicity, relationship and housing tenure – taking just minutes to complete.
The more detailed socioeconomic information is now collected through the American Community Survey. The survey provides current data about your community every year, rather than once every 10 years. It is sent to a small percentage of the population on a rotating basis throughout the decade. No household will receive the survey more often than once every five years.
View more information on the American Community Survey.
“I used to live in Texas, so I know what it’s like to be around a lot of Hispanics (both legal and illegal). They are not the enemy. ” JJ
Well that’s good you are used to them. In less than a decade they will be the major ethnic group in Wichita and Kansas.
as long as illegals are still breaking our law – ICE should NOT rest from its pursuit of the criminal lawbreakers who have no right to be here.
What the heck is race though?
Whatever it is, it will be on the 2010 form.
Ethnicity, that could be interesting to define too.
“”I used to live in Texas, so I know what it’s like to be around a lot of Hispanics (both legal and illegal). They are not the enemy. ” JJ”
They ARE the enemy of our economy and our children’s future … their existence here is ruining healthcare, education, and social services, in general, that prevent us from helping our OWN LEGAL residents more. Why is it that our OWN citizens’ welfare is expendable because we’re supposed to feel sorry for people who are here illegally? I don’t understand that. To me that’s hypocritical.
Such hatred…
Group them all together and say that they are ruining our country… A majority of them just want to work, provide for their family. Almost all of the children speak english. In a generation the language thing won’t even be a problem. Maybe if we registered them and got them started paying taxes we would see a huge boost in our economy.
For purposes of this Ordinance,
Illegal Alien means an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States, according to the terms of UnitedStates Code Title 8, section 1101 et. seq.
Who says we can’t prosecute those in charge of Sanctuary Cities and Housing?
SECTION a. HARBORING ILLEGAL ALIENS.Section 18-503. HARBORING ILLEGAL ALIENS. It is unlawful for any person or business entity7 that owns a dwelling unit in the County and is subject toSection 18-37, to harbor an illegal alien in the dwelling unit, knowing or inreckless disregard ofthe fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, unless such harboring is otherwise expresslypermitted by federal law
For the purposes of this section, to let, lease, or rent a dwelling unit to an illegal alien, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien hascome to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law,shall be deemed to constitute harboring. To suffer or permit the occupancy of the dwelling unit by an illegal alien, knowing or in reckless disregard of thefact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, shall also be deemed to constitute harboring.”
Definitions of Aliens, immigrants, etc.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001101—-000-.html
“Everyone agrees that we should all obey the law in normal circumstances” JJ
JJ you are all over the place. Earlier post you did NOT agree we should obey the law in the case of illegal criminal activity related to foreigners who sneak into the USA.
“And BTW, I have traveled internationally to Europe and Asia, as well as to Mexico. ” JJ
That qualifies JJ’s remarks for some reason. Maybe as the only world traveler on the blog?
“I have also had to deal with immigration because of friends and loved ones.” JJ
And the above has exactly what to do with the law on immigration?
“I also think it is extremely important to follow the law.” JJ
Well we agree on something. People who enter our nation under the rule of law are criminals and here illegally.
“But “legal” and “moral” are not necessarily the same thing, and we should not forget that.” JJ
Moral doesn’t fit well with some anti-christian right liberals, unless it is convenient.
But we shouldn’t forget this is a legal issue: capturing, detaining, and deporting illegal criminals from our country is a matter of law. It should be a high priority. Bring the troops home from Iraq and put them on the border. Protect our own nation. Seal the border.
Kick the ones here – out.
“Ask tyler. He’s the one that seems to think that Mexicans are going to destroy our society.”
NO SIR JB, I am talking illegal aliens, which come from a lot of different countries. Coming here illegally is illegal. Being a MExican though does not grant one that right. That would be racism to grant it on that “race”.
Then, Tyler, why was it okay for european immigrants to take this land illegally?
“Wrong, Kansas became a territory in 1854. Wichita was settled in the 1860’s.Come on, Mr. History Buff. There was a Kansas, and this was land that was federally sat aside for Indian reservation. People moved onto it illegally. Hence illegal immigration.”
Posted by: jb | August 18, 2007 at 02:36 PM
jb, you are being ridiculous and stupid.
The Wichita Native Americans are known to have been in what is known as Kansas since and most likely before the 1600s when the Spanish came and found them here.
Putting a settlement on the Arkansas River by the Wichita N.A.s doesn’t equate them to being illegal immigrants.
jb, you are starting to look pathetically sad as I had warned you about before.
The Wichita got chased down to the Arkansas River by hostile tribes.
Indigenous people by definition cannot be illegal immigrants.
jb, stop arguing this, it is making you look stupid.
JB and JJ and TOM are all illegal alien supporting pukes. They believe their view is the “moral high ground” but they are just another cog in the expolitation maching.
Mexico deports stranded migrants
Hundreds of illegal immigrants have been deported from Mexico after they became stranded when a train route through the country was closed down. Central American immigrants are known to cross Mexico’s southern border illegally on their way to the US, often riding on train roofs or stowing away in carriages.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6948263.stm
Still not on the right argument, Kansas, but nice try. I am refering to the fact that this was a federal Indian reservation. Settlers began coming here illegally. In the late 1860’s Wichita residents sent a delegation to Washington to petition for the right to stay here, saying they had already set out a livelyhood here.
Sorry, Kansas, you can’t even take the time to read my posts and figure out what my arguments are.
Keep attacking the people and not the arguments.
jb,
Read the following sentence slowly and try to comprehend it.
Indigenous people cannot be considered illegal aliens.
Illegal criminal activity, by illegal alien critters is not an “inconvenience” to be ignored:
“Minnesota residents can breath a little easier knowing this criminal is out of the country,” said Scott Baniecke, field office director for ICE’s Bloomington office. “ICE prioritizes cases that impact community safety, and this man is a prime example of the type of criminal we target for arrest and removal.” Baniecke oversees ICE’s detention and removal program for a five-state area that includes Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa and Nebraska.
Between Oct. 1, 2005 and March 31, 2006, ICE deported 1,423 illegal aliens from the five-state area. Of that number, 627 had criminal convictions in addition to being immigration law violators. During fiscal year 2005, ICE deported 3,060 illegal aliens from the same geographic area, 1,368 of them with criminal convictions.
http://www.ice.gov/pi/news/newsreleases/articles/060526bloomington.htm
Kansas,
read my arguments and try to comprehend them.
I DIDN’T SAY THAT THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLE WERE THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS!!!!!!!!!!!!
I said that the white people who settled here, ON A FEDERAL INDIAN RESERVATION were the illegal immigants.
“Then, Tyler, why was it okay for european immigrants to take this land illegally?”
Let’s just say you were correct on this point, just Who stole the land? IT was the French, the Spanish, and the English. There were NO AMERICANS at the time. America was the evolution of the colonialism of the european countries, but those here in AMERICA stole NOTHING. We fought and structured a country WHERE NONE EXISTED before.
So in reality there was nothing to steal it from.
You want to raise hell about it being stolen you will have that stupid and unintelligent argument ignored for it’s adsurdity. However, you wanna take ti to heart, go argue with Spain, Portugal, France, and England.
But your beef in the modern world is irrelevant, and it is the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, you f’ing freak.
Accept it or leave you self hating POS!
When I said ’settlers’ I meant white settlers. Squatting illegally on Indian land. Sat aside BY LAW by the Federal goverment.
You are starting to come across as quiet dense.
Hey Tom! You think these bad boys will fill out one of the Census Forms?
Predatory Aliens
Tens of thousands of violent crimes are committed each year against our children by predatory aliens who should never have been allowed to enter or stay in our country. The most disturbing aspect of this problem is the thousands of unregistered sex offenders who have entered the United States illegally and therefore are not being tracked. These dangerous sex offenders are not included in the Megan’s Law data bases, and not even the police know their whereabouts or identities.
http://www.predatoryaliens.com/
FEDERAL INDIAN RESERVATION
SAT ASIDE BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
WHITE PEOPLE SETTLED ON THAT LAND ILLEGALLY.
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GAVE THEM AMNESTY.
You people are not very smart.
jb,
For the most part, people who traveled westward into Kansas territory were not illegal immigrants. They arrived in federally sanctioned harbors and ports.
The only reason it was named Kansas Territory is because the Congress of the United States allowed it to be given that name.
Your arguments although cute are non sequitur fallacies that do not follow the laws and history of the U.S.
Damn it, Kansas, it’s documented history. Look it up. When the white people settled Wichita it was not a sanctioned port or anything else. It was set aside indian reservation.
SO SO SO DENSE.
My gosh! I looked at the site posted above and there are child abusers loose all over our country!
Thank-you for providing it.
http://www.predatoryaliens.com/
WHITE PEOPLE SETTLED ON THAT LAND ILLEGALLY.
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GAVE THEM AMNESTY. Posted by: JB | August 18, 2007 at 03:04 PM
You just defeated your own argument jb.
That’s right, the U.S. Government gave settlers permission to settle there.
The U.S. Government owned the territory of Kansas at the time of their settlement – not the Wichita Native Americans.
What a waste of time on a ridiculous argument.
Canada Deports Illegal Aliens In Droves – With No Amnesty
Canada has begun deporting its illegal immigrants with only a few days notice – read the result.
Hint: Immigration Canada said there will not be an amnesty. The federal agency said they have a legal duty to remove people who have come to this country without following the proper procedures.
jb,
What you left out of your argument of fallacy is this:
The Louisiana Purchase.
Check the date…
The Louisiana Purchase was the acquisition by the United States of approximately 530 million acres (828,000 sq mi or 2,100,000 km²) of French territory in 1803, at the cost of about 3¢ per acre (7¢ per ha); totaling $15 million or 80 million French francs. Including interest, America finally paid $23,213,568 for the Louisiana territory.[1] The land purchased contained all of present-day Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Minnesota south of Mississippi River, much of North Dakota, nearly all of South Dakota, northeastern New Mexico, northern Texas, the portions of Montana, Wyoming, and Colorado east of the Continental Divide, and Louisiana on both sides of the Mississippi River, including the city of New Orleans.”
That’s right 1803.
The U.S. owned the land that included Kansas by 1803.
Your argument holds no merit and as I said before ridiculous.
I don’t know why I try, Kansas.
The Federal government made a treaty that gave this area to native americans (not nessasarily Wichita Indians). When white people started settling on it because they decided they liked the land, they changed the law, gave the white people amnesty.Disregared the claims of the Indians because they didn’t life like us. This was repeated all across the west.
You obviously have much less knowledge of history then you claim, Kansas.
The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States of America. It was adopted in its original form on September 17, 1787, by the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and later ratified by the people in conventions in each state in the name of “We the People.” The U.S. Constitution is the oldest written national constitution in effect in the world.
Our Federal government and some members of Congress (DEMOCRAT AND REPUBLICAN) are failing to uphold the US Constitution with regard to IMPROPER ENTRY BY ALIEN, the supreme law of the land:
Under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, “Improper Entry by Alien,”any citizen of any country other than the United States who:
Enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or placeother than as designated by immigration officers; or
Eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers; or
Attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfullyfalse or misleading representation or the willful concealment of amaterial fact; has committed a federal crime.
1. The topic of illegal immigration is not about race, religion, creed,gender, sexual preference, or the poverty level of other countries – itis about breaking the law. When a foreign national crosses our borders oroverstays a visa, it is against the law, and the lawbreaker is in factan illegal alien. It does not matter whether the illegal alien is green,blue, or purple; the issue is one of law enforcement, not race.
2. A 1986 bill rewarded criminal behavior of 1.3 million lawbreakers. Since US borders were not secured, this 1986 amnesty was an invitation for 12-20 more illegal aliens to illegally cross US borders. Lawmakers in 1986, assured taxpayers that their amnesty was a one-time deal that would solve the problem! There are 11,000 border patrol agents that cover 8,000 miles of US borders, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Our Federal government says they could secure borders in Third World countries but NOT our own US borders!Jun 6, 2007
Should the law be: a)ignored b)changed c)enforced:
Under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, “Improper Entry by Alien,” any citizen of any country other than the United States who:
Enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or placeother than as designated by immigration officers; or
Eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers; or
Attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact;
has committed a federal crime.
But the French stole the land from the Indians before they sold it to the US.
The US then bought stolen property.
The lousiana purchase has nothing to do with this. We gave them land, then broke our own laws and took it away when it was convient.
And the Indians stole the land from us Neanderthals. It wasn’t there’s to begin with.
The french actually bought the land from the spanish who had in turn stolen it from the indians.
Regardless, we as Americans have no moral high ground in this argument.
When does it become our land through War?
Just say we took it, and get it over with.
We be here now.
And now we are defending OUR land from the Mexicans who are trying to steal it from us.
So they be theives too.
Argument over yet?
jb,
One more time, then you are on ignore.
Violation onto tribal reservations was a violation of treaties, but not an incursion or acts defined as to establish a status of illegal aliens.
There is no such statute that was ever written that shows that settlers in the 19th century were ever considered illegal aliens because they violated treaties by settling on Native American reservations.
Native American reservations on under the jurisdiction and provisos of the United States Government and is not considered a foreign land, but rather a unique entity set aside for purposes described.
Entering a Native American Reservation violates codified law, but does not yield the description that any persons or persons not so defined by U.S. laws are illegal aliens – especially in regards to the settlers of the 19th century.
The Native Americans were already on Federal Land called Reservations. Settling on a land DOES NOT DENOTE ILLEGAL ALIEN STATUS BECAUSE IT IS A UNITED STATES FEDERAL RESERVATION!
Get it jb? The reservation is governed by the U.S. It is not a foreign country.
Continue the cycle, that’s the American way.
By the way jb, thanks for hijacking this topic with your stupid argument.
Those who resort to name-calling must not be able to state their position intelligently enough to participate in meaningful dialogue or debate.
Also, since this thread concerns the Census, here’s this little known tidbit:
There is a larger percentage of the US population that speaks English today than there was a century ago. According to the 1890 Census, the percentage of the US population who did not speak English at all was 3.6% (not counting Indians living on reservations), about three times greater than the 1.3% of the population according to the 2000 Census. And while the percentage of people who “speak a language other than English at home” (this is not necessarily to the exclusion of English as many assume) has grown from 11% in 1980 to 18% in 2000, the percentage of people who speak a language other than English at home who ALSO speak English “very well” (that is, fluently) also rose at about the same rate during the same period.
Ignore me all you want, Kansas.
If the settlers weren’t afraid of being considered illegal, why did they send representatives to Washington to petition for the right to stay at the Wichita settlement?
If the indians didn’t consider us taking the land illegal, why did they fight us to the last man through the 19th century?
We do what we want, when we want to, that’s our legacy from the 19th century.
This isn’t hatred for America, this just the fact. We can recognize our errors, and learn from them, or we can attempt to cover them up.
Kansas, you make no attempt to learn from history, or apply it to our lives to day. You seek only to propagate your narrow view that makes you feel comfortable. I once had the same opinions that you hold, then I started reading about history, reading the other sides of the stories and seeing that we weren’t perhaps always in the right.Your interpretation of history is narrow and ill informed. For that, I feel sorry for you.
Have I nice day, Kansas.
What are you talking about, Caveman?The Neanderthals are the Indians.BTW, the Indians were of 500 different nations that fought each other when the white men settle here, but that is in the past, it doesn’t mean any thing today.
And of course any argument that’s not yours is stupid.
Real mature.
You see then, the Census will not be counting illegal immigrants, because that data will NOT be on the 2010 form.
There’s no need then to stop rounding up illegal immigrants, unless you want to give inflated numbers to those States with more illegal immigrants then others.
And THAT is the goal – to count as many illegals in those BLUE Lib Dem states as you can, in order to steal Representatives from Red States with fewer illegals, to Blue States with more illegals.
cya JB, don’t hijack threads with your own personal theories or arguments that are irrelevant to the topic and you won’t get ignored or belittled.
People usually resort to belittling when they don’t have a intellegent response to another person’s argument.
Congrats, Kansas, you managed to give more insults than arguments to people who disagree with you.
JB and Kansas, both of you go stand in the corner now for 30 minutes.
When you shake hands and say you are sorry, you can then come back.
Yes sir.Please don’t make me stay after school for detention again.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6948263.stm
Posted by: Minuteman | August 18, 2007 at 02:58 PM
What, Mexico uses the military to defend its territory and deports illegal aliens? What a great ideas! Why didn’t we think of that?
I gave several intelligent and factual responses jb. You lost your argument because a 19th century settler who entered the country legally or was already a citizen cannot be considered an illegal immigrant on a land OWNED BY THE UNITED STATES. It doesn’t matter if the land is called a reservation, a county or a State.
Your classification of calling settlers “illegal immigrants. on Federally owned land was and is and will forever be a flawed argument.
U.S. Federal Reservation – Get it?
I wish I could get inside your brain and see what goes on in there.
We made treaties that said we would never settle the lands that we sat aside for the indians. We broke those treaties when it became convient. We occupied and took the land. Now we say other people can’t come here.
Simple as that.
good lord, it’s the resident Nazi and his profane vulgar comments.
I thought Indian Reservations were considered to be soveriegn territory – a separate country for the Tribe?
Isn’t that why you see tribal license plates?
As I said before jb, treaty violations.
Not your equation that settlers could be classified as illegal immigrants.
The land was owned by the U.S. Government and designated as a reservation (reserved for use) by an indigenous population.) Entering and settling on the land DOES NOT EQUATE THE STATUS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT.
That was your argument, it is defeated, you’re done with that discussion, it got blown out of the water. Move on with something else.
Kansas and JB would you both stop! You two need to exchange email addresses or telephone numbers. No disrespect, but you are both being rude with this running argument with your fast one liners back and forth.
Sorry. I’ll go back and sit in my corner. No offense intended.
Slow typer
Read the post above your’s buddy.
Law’s, law, whether treaty or not. We broke it when it became convient.
I apologize, your right. I’m done.
(above comment not directed toward you, Kansas, but to another blog monitor.)
Isn’t that why you see tribal license plates?
Posted by: Salt in the Wound
Yes we are our own nation, with limitations. However, we do have the finest casino’s in Kansas! Come on down and see us sometime.You don’t have to worry about the local vote. Buy your smokes cheap.
Golden Eagle Casino1121 Goldfinch RoadHorton, Kansas
Harrah’s Prairie Band Casino12305 150th RoadMayetta, Kansas
Sac & Fox Casino1322 US Highway 75Powhattan, Kansas
Casino White Cloud777 Jackpot DriveWhite Cloud, Kansas
I thought Indian Reservations were considered to be soveriegn territory – a separate country for the Tribe?
Isn’t that why you see tribal license plates?
Posted by: Salt in the Wound | August 18, 2007 at 03:37 PM
No Salt, Native American Reservations are not Sovereign. They are governed and controlled by the Laws of the United States. A reservation is land set aside for use by indigenous people for their purposes as described by the laws of the United States.
The exception to the type of Sovereignty you are referring to in the United States only applies to Embassies and their related holdings.
Native American Reservations are not considered in said manner.
Screw em then.
Native American Reservations are not considered in said manner.
Posted by: Kansas
Now that’s a matter of your opinion. Some of us see things a little differently.
Lakota Nation
Put your bow and arrow down Lakota, nobody wants that crappy land we gave ya anyway.
The casinos are sorta nice though.
Screw em then.Posted by: Frontiersman
If only we had thought to have a stronger law on illegal immigrants and more importantly -
enforced them!
Asking questions about legal or illegal status has *never* been on any US Census form. All they ask is whether you are a US citizen and how (birth, naturalization), and if you are not a US citizen, what country you were born in. As long as people are not to afraid to participate in the Census, illegal immigrants will be counted in the 2010 Census in the “non-citizen” category (along with all the legal immigrants).
Now that’s a matter of your opinion. Some of us see things a little differently.
Lakota Nation
Posted by: Lakota | August 18, 2007 at 03:54 PM
That may be true Lakota. But seeing something differently and reality are two different things.
Black Hawk nailed this Indianimmigrantion thread.
If we had held our ground and kept the white people from moving east, we could have kept our country.
Next time, we’ll have to make sure there are immigration laws and enforce them!
Horst–
You never told me where y’all get your white sheets and dunce caps.
KKKMart?
I had your post pulled, in case your wondering.
Hey, you know that part in “The Blues Brothers” where Jake and Elwood run the neo-Nazis off the bridge and they all end up in the river?
I really like that part.
“This machine KILLS facists” –sticker Woody Guthrie put on his guitar . . .
Actually Wahawk, the bigger tribes were already pushing smaller tribes Westward before the white people even came.
Some of the plains tribes were not plains people originally, but had to become so, because they were chased out of their home territories by other Native American tribes.
Right, Wahawk if you or any other NA’s want to know anything about your own culture and history, just ask Kansas.
You know, Horst, I want to meet you in person and kick your ass.
When and where?
Once again those Spaniards (Mexicans) are trying to get the land back, those damn Indian givers.
I’ll hold your coat Capn. :)
(notes one of the few times Capn and I agree.)
Heh . . . silence from Horst.
I haven’t met a neo-Nazi yet that wasn’t scared of his own shadow.
Well, thanks, Kansas.
Nice to know you can be wrong without being nuts . . . hehehe . . .
Actually Capn, Native Americans know quite a bit about their own culture of course.
But when it comes to the history of the Native American in the United States, with the exception of Native American Scholars, the average N.A. descendant does not know the history and the anthropological flow of N.A’s in North America.
Some of the plains tribes were not plains people originally, but had to become so, because they were chased out of their home territories by other Native American tribes.
Posted by: Kansas
Please Kansas, haven’t you had enough teaching history today? Most of us went to school and learned these basic’s.
Put down the chalk, wipe your your hands on your pants, turn off the classroom lights, and close the door on your way out.;-)
Black Hawk nailed this Indianimmigrantion thread.
If we had held our ground and kept the white people from moving east, we could have kept our country.
Next time, we’ll have to make sure there are immigration laws and enforce them!
Posted by: Wahawk
Of course I nailed in Wahawk. I lived it!
But my own personal observation is it too late now, as it was too late for my people hundreds of years ago. The new North American’s are already here in mass. The rest of it is just white America making the adjustment to being the minority. It starts with fear, anger, and frustration. Fear of those different, anger at seing a loss of something you thought belonged to you or your way, and frustration upon realizing there is nothing you can do about it.
The adjustment will take years. There will be racial tension, denial, hurt, and pain.
But the tide has already arrived.
Kansas, they are guessing Asiatic.So in a sense, everybody is descended from one continent.But that is in the past, it doesn’t mean any thing today.
You are of course correct Jayhawk.
My old history Professors would be ashamed of me for using such unstructured references though.
Time for a nap or perhaps a quiet movie.
hmmm,
or maybe a bit of both…
Chief Black Hawk, I am part Indian, Mexican and White Englishman.I would say that you pure breeds are the minorities.
or maybe a bit of both…
Posted by: Kansas
I don’t think the hawk meant for you to leave the blog Kansas. Figure of speech sorta thing?
Enjoyed your postings today.
:-)
“The typical person who crosses our border illegally is a Mexican who cannot survive where he is. Current law does not provide a realistic way for them to come here legally.”
THAT is MExico’s problem NOT the US’s. They are the only ones that can fix their country AND the US cannot take in every person with a bad life in the world. There simply is NOT ENOUGH ROOM to do this.
Why can’t you idiots figure this out.
mexican people enjoy this service http://www.zecard.com :))
It is saddening to see all the hate and venom on this message board. Most of the immigrants in this community are contributing a lot more to the well being of Wichita than the people writing on this message board are.
JB… KANSAS was made a State in 1861… Wichita was already here by that time… So was Dodge City, and Topeka, and other towns as well… Are you forgetting about the Kansas/Nebraska Act of 1854??? And how Kansas was brought in the Union as a FREE State?? Are you forgetting our State History, so you can make your NON points???
I dont care what professor you studied under, KANSAS was still a State in 1861, and Wichita was already here… I had FAMILY here then… Geez!!!
The typical person who crosses our border illegally is a Mexican who cannot survive where he is. Current law does not provide a realistic way for them to come here legally
Whoever posted this insane argument has slapped the face of each legal immigrant. How dare you say there is no realistic sway for them to come here legally. There is always a legal way – but the greedy employers do not want legal immigrants – they prefer the illegal immigrants because they are cheaper and can be manipulated into whatever working conditions are offered.
NO wonder we have an illegal immigration problem in the US with people like the poster that posted this insane argument.
Dave – this is not hate speech here. It is only legal American citizens standing up for what is right. If illegal immigrants want to come to America and work, then let them do it the legal way. If they want to become citizens, then they can pay taxes like the rest of us. The problem with the illegals is they are coming here, having babies, living 20+ in one house and most being paid in cash tax free and they qualify for welfare, WIC and every other government program. . Is this fair to the legal citizens who are being taxed to support those programs?
That is what is not fair. You call it hatred – I call it what it is – legal citizens demanding that illegals start contributing rather than just taking all the time!
This was above and is typical nationwide:
Between Oct. 1, 2005 and March 31, 2006, ICE deported 1,423 illegal aliens from the five-state area. Of that number, 627 had criminal convictions in addition to being immigration law violators. During fiscal year 2005, ICE deported 3,060 illegal aliens from the same geographic area, 1,368 of them with criminal convictions.
http://www.ice.gov/pi/news/newsreleases/articles/060526bloomington
All parents should read:
are child abusers loose all over our country!
http://www.predatoryaliens.com/
It’s just the law. Ignore it libs:
Under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, “Improper Entry by Alien,” any citizen of any country other than the United States who:
Enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or placeother than as designated by immigration officers; or
Eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers; or
Attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact;has committed a federal crime.
Chas,
You are right Kansas became a state in 1861, but Wichita was settled after the war and incorporated in 1870. What I said above was Kansas was made a territory in 1854. The eastern areas were settled first (northeastern for the most part), which was were the jayhawking and what not went on.
There were people moving to the area in the early 1860’s, but the war forstalled the founding of Wichita.
http://www.wichita.gov/Residents/History/
I don’t know how to do the fancy hyperlinks, but for your educational edifacation, here’s a short history of wichita
Here’s the important bits:
” When the region’s native peoples were “removed” to Indian Territory in 1867 to open the area for white settlement, the trading business followed them, using the Wichita site as a base and establishing the Chisholm Trail as a route of transport.”
And just for you, Chas: “The City of Wichita was incorporated in 1870 as a village due to the efforts of Mead, Greiffenstein and other pioneers, and became county seat of Sedgwick County soon thereafter.”
And we had a casino and legal gambling and the city flourished.
The Munger’s were already here in this little cow town in the 1850’s… LONG before 1870… Wichita was an established community BEFORE the Civil War!! Better check your history again, JB!!
Actually JB, C. C. Arnold came to what is now Sedgwick County in 1857. The Mosley Ranch was established shortly thereafter in what is now Park City or close to it.
The Wichita (Native Americans) came to the Arkansas Valley in 1864 after a rough winter in the (Oklahoma) territories.
That’s seven years after a ranch had already been established in the Wichita area.
There was an established trading post where Wichita stands by 1863.
The Osage had claim to the land and indeed sold tracts of land in accordance with the treaty of 1865.
The Wichita N.A.’s were not land owners and were simply squatters on Osage land as they came to the Arkansas River junction to escape bad years of winters circa 1864.
The Wichita’s main home was in Oklahoma near the Wichita mountains and other places.
Kansas and Nebraska became territories in 1854 and reduced the Indian territories to that in Oklahoma. So that furthers the argument that the Wichita had no claim to permanent settlement on the Arkansas River in 1864. Yes, they had been in the general area what is believed to be during Coronado’s time, but they were not land owners and never lay claim to any land ownership.
One important reason the Wichita never lay claim to ownership of land is because they were bands and not really considered a tribe. There were many bands of a greater Wichita speaking N.A.’s, but the same language does not equate a tribe which could have negotiated with the U.S. in regards to lands.
The Osage, however, were tribal and had the proper council form of government to negotiate treaties with the U.S. and did indeed sell tracts of land to settlers, including those in the Kansas territory.
You can go to the national archives and find out who owned what and when exactly. You will not find the Wichita listed as land sellers or owners though.
dear lord chas. click the link you fool!
It’s well documented that ranches and trading posts were established in areas not open for settlement, so this does nothing more to further your claim.
I’m not just talking about the Wichita indians, but this is getting ridiculous. You are really insane if you think that the white settlers had prior claim to this land. This area was a federal reservation. That’s all there is to it. Much like the rest of Kansas at some point.
I’m done going around and around with this. I only know what I’ve read in the Wichita history books, and it’s silly to argue it.
“The Munger’s were already here in this little cow town in the 1850’s… LONG before 1870″
We didn’t get the cattle trade here until 69 or 70 I think. We diverted the trade from park city.
Funny reading you hicks writing about your hick town of Wichytaaand not even agreeing to your own heritage.
Laughing my ass off.
Cowtown USA.
You think anyone else in America CARES?
Bunch of country bumkins one and all.
Ya, your cool.
“I get my kicks off of making fun of where people live!”
I think you spelled bumpkin incorrectly. Please refer to the Wizard of Oz, Chapter two.
It was all filmed in Hollywood, so there really is no Kansas connection.
They keep the cows. The great movie belongs to the ages.
I get my kicks off of making fun of where people live!”
Posted by: Sam
I don’t really. I was reading this WE Blog thing from the heart of America and the heading on Illegal Immigration caught my eye.So I thought I’d give it a click.
Still laughing at what I read when I got to it.
You guys are so backward out there you don’t even know when your own town was founded!
Forget the immigration issue. You guys need to discuss indoor plumbing and electricity first.
Yeeeeee Haaaaaaaa!
You know, I never was in Toledo, Ohio for the night. When I wrote this song, it was about Wichita, Kansas:
And wive and wet wiveLet this be our mottoLet’s let the sleeping dogs lie – ping dogs lie
And here’s to the dogs of Toledo, OhioLadies, we bid you goodbye
JB,
You should try and read the original treaties and the documents associated with the treaties to get the actual history of this area.
The Osage treaty was settled by 1863 and they were paid for the land. They owned (by treaty) land from a line in about the middle of Kansas till what is now the Cherokee Strip.
“In 1808, a few years subsequent to the acquisition of Louisiana by the United States, a treaty was made at Fort Clark, then recently built, on the Missouri River, between the United States and the Osage nation.
“And in consideration of the advantages which we derive from the stipulations contained in the foregoing article, we, the chiefs and warriors of the Great and Little Osage, for ourselves and our nation respectively, covenant and agree with the United States, that the boundary line between our nations and the United States shall be as follows, to wit: Beginning at Fort Clark, on the Missouri, five miles above Fire Prairie, and running thence a due south course to the river Arkansas and down the same to the Mississippi, hereby ceding and relinquishing forever to the United States all the lands which lie east of the said line, and north of the southwardly bank of the said river Arkansas and all lands situated northwardly of the river Missouri.”
October, 1821), describe the villages of Osages of the Arkansaw somewhat more in detail:
“The Osages of the Arkansaw occupy several villages. The principal village contains about three hundred lodges or huts and about three thousand souls. The lodges are generally from fifty to a hundred feet in length and irregularly arranged. They cover a surface of about half a mile square. * * * * * The men are generally of a lofty stature, of a fine form and of a frank and open countenance. In council, they are dignified, and in their speeches eloquent. The women, although strong and active, are not proportionally tall. The children are numerous and remarkably submissive to parental authority.”
On the 2d day of June, 1825, the Osage nation relinquished its title to all the lands it still claimed in Missouri and Arkansas, and in addition, ceded to the United States “all lands lying west of the said State of Missouri and Territory of Arkansas, north and west of the Red River, south of the Kansas River, and east of a line to be drawn from the head sources of the Kansas southwardly through the Rock Saline.”
On September 19, 1865, by the terms of the treaty made at Canville Trading Post, the Great and Little Osage Indians sold to the United States the following defined country:
“Beginning at the southeast corner of their present reservation, and running thence north, with the eastern boundary thereof, fifty miles, to the northeast corner; thence west with the northern line, thirty miles; thence south fifty miles, to the southern boundary to said reservation; and thence east with said boundary to the place of beginning; provided that the western boundary of said land herein ceded shall not extend farther westward than a line commencing at a point on the southern boundary of said Osage country, one mile east of the place where the Verdigris River crosses the southern boundary of the State of Kansas.” For this tract of country, afterward known as the “Osage Ceded Lands,” the United States was to pay $300,000.”
So as you can see JB, the history of Wichita is more complicated than you think. What I posted is just a micro tip of the iceberg.
This sort of determination takes years of document study, some of which can be found in the National Archives and a lot of it gone forever.
This is why we depend on Anthropologists to sort out the missing pieces.
Your original assumptions about the Wichita, though noteworthy are mostly incorrect in their role of the modern day city of Wichita.
There is much more than history books to making a study of history. History books are compiled information with usually no research used in that research available to the reader.
If you were to read the research notes of a history book writer, you might well come up with completely different ideas and theories.
If you ever done genealogy you will find a lot of mistaken references that history book often make. There are some that you can prove and some you cannot prove. There are some though where you can say with a degree of certainty that the author was incorrect because of X, Y or Z.
Anyway JB, continue reading history books. I urge you to look at historical documents first before you try to assess a particular time frame in history.
You might just find that historians omit and write their history books for the reader’s and their own pleasure rather than being historically accurate. Most historical writers admit to doing this and some don’t.
But that’s life.—–
That’s what I’m always trying to do, Kansas, and I will say that I appreciate your insight. I do my best to always be learning and expanding my knowledge, however limited it is. My profession lies far outside that of history, and the reading and research I do is on my own time.
In north America, much of the conquest was accomplished through economic means (treaties, ect.) it seems, while the conquest of the south (mexico, south America,) was purely conquest from the beginning. It is interesting to see that those are now the nations that are considered almost third world.
Overwhelmingly, in United States History, when we wanted a piece of land, we got it, whether it ment breaking or making new treaties.
I do know that I read in Prof. Miner’s book that Wichita residents had to petition the government to let them stay here in the area. To me this means that their presense here wasn’t entirely legal. I’m sure that the whole story was much more complicated though, and I defer to your knowledge.
Kansas,
Would your history post indicate a general suppport for illegal immigrants and whether or not they will complete census surveys?
Give it up Verna Jean,
These folks aren’t interested in discussion immigration. You might as well be talking about the price of corn in China. Or go fishing.
I’m sorry. It’s all my fault. I was trying to make a point (related to immigration at least in my twisted mind I suppose) and it got way out of hand.
I am kind of impressed with my apparent ability to piss people off enough that I can stear the entire conversation.
Well it is now from Dallas and other southern state to the fine shitty City of Wichitty.
http://www.kansas.com/news/updates/story/151764.html
4 racial epithet slinging hispanics beatup and rob a white guy.
HATE CRIME!!!!
This had better be prosecuted as a hate crime. Just because the victim was white does not mean the HATE CRIMS legilastion does not apply.
HATE CRIME BY HISPANICS!!!!!!
That’s o.k. JB, appears no one wants to follow the thread.
I think fishing is more interesting anyway.
I see the Immigration folks following-up on those households that do NOT complete a census form.
It’s the law. They will have to fill out the forms.
If they don’t, they can be caught.
If they do, and lie on the form, it will be difficult, but through triangulation of databases, they may be caught that way too.
Hey Pat my man! How are you?
Do you like to fish?
Verna Jean, I’m not if my history post supports anything other than what it is.
Let me first disagree with the term illegal immigrants.
I do believe from what I read, the term is “Illegal Alien.”
Compliance with filling out a survey and the actuality of getting Illegal Aliens to fill out (with or without assistance) a survey may lay somewhere between doable and improbable.
The objection I have are to the dishonest brokers of the Census data that use it in apportionment of representation, electoral votes and other Federally controlled programs.
There will be a great temptation by all states to bleed out extra benefit of illegal aliens to their advantage by liberally interpreting what may or may not be accurately obtained census data.
There is no ID check when a census survey is done, other than the word of person giving the data.
Kick out procedures by the Census bureau in relationship to bad data (social security numbers and other ID numbers) have been known to have occurred.
In fact, there is a ruckus about social security data being left out for public view by the Census bureau because of a database out put error. This error exposes hundreds of thousands of people to fraud and abuse.
In fact, these social security compromised numbers could be read via Web page via the Internet! I don’t know if this has been corrected, but it demonstrates the holes in the Census Data system.
Now, taking into account the method and application of data by the Census bureau, I am very concerned that there will be a great deal of fraud committed by Illegal Aliens in the 2010 census.
Congress needs to take action now to prevent fraud that can be used to realign states population and therefore skew processes from election to receiving federal funds.
It’s a disaster waiting to happen.
Love fish. Would love to go fishing up North. Haven’t heard any reports lately though on how good the catch is up there.
Pat,
You too? My family has traditionally escaped to Canada for Walleye fishing. Beautiful country.
To change the conversation you have to use a fine mixture of excellent pissing off skills and jedi mind tricks.
Wave your hand in front of the computer and say “You WANT to talk about fishing.”
I’m getting too tired for this.
So JB do you fish?
Damn your mind tricks.
Can’t…. stop… must… talk.. about fish.
Yes, yes I do. Poorly.
Walleye is my favorite. SW Ontario. Northern are fun to catch, gotta fillet the Y bones out though.
My exotic location is Lake Afton. Fine brown, murky waters, stretching as far as… well not very far.
Walleye is our favorite for eathing and bringing home. Canada has dropped the limit though, which sucks because their prices have gone up. PLUS – they changed the law on their GPT tax. Tourists can no longer get it refunded. Probably have to pay for that free healthcare somehow.
Anyway, we go north of Souix Lookout. God’s country. All trees and lakes. No telephones, tv’s, or much of anything.
There is better fishing in Mexico in some places than there are in Kansas. :)
Most popular type of fishing in Kansas is for catfish. There are other species of course, all of which elude me when I try to catch them. :)
So Pat what do you use for bait for Walleye? We use Red Daredevils for northern. We catch them for the fun of big fish fight. Agreed on the Y bones.Unless you have a camp where they clean the fish (American Plan), they are more pain than they are worth for eating. Call em snakes locally.
I can second the catfish statement, Kansas. I can never catch anything else.
I’ve been north of the Kenora area and likely close to Sioux Lookout, which is a little farther East.
1. Provincial Sales Tax. 7%2. Canadian Sales Tax GST? 8%3. They screw you on the currency exchange.4. They say “aay” all the time at the end of a sentence, aay!
Very annoying, aay?
Usually catch Northern fishing for Walleye. Don’t usually intend to fish for the bony things.
Sometimes they jump onto a walleye when you are reeling one in. If you’re lucky, you catch 2 at once!
Aay, I’ve never been lucky enough to get two at once!
Yes, and prices have soared since our early years. It really bothers me that they only take American currency/cash for payment. They don’t want their own Canadian money! I understood that when it was 75 cents on the dollar. But not today, when the dollars are nearly equal. Plus, you know they are not reporting it. It avoids their huge taxes. Money they need to fund their social programs and socialized medicine.
There are walleye to be caught in Kansas. Closest to me is El Dorado lake I believe.
I’ve eaten walleye caught in Kansas and I noticed that the fillets are in four pieces rather than two.
Must be a technique of trimming them out, but darned if I know what it is.
Socialized medicine is why their fish are so healthy.
I know, prices are going up.
Almost makes you want to fish in the US, maybe Minnesota would be similar fishing and avoid the Canadian hassles.
Go any further south you get stuck eating catfish.
In Canada, I’ve been at camps where an Indian will fillet all your fish. Pay him a Canadian dollar and he ok. Pay him an American dollar and he be good. Just give him a cold beer and he be great!
One or two beers is all you need, depending on how many fish you caught that day!
And those Indians could fillet Walleye and Northern like you wouldn’t beleive!
Can’t recall if they had 2 or 4 walleye pieces. Probably depended on the fish size and quantity of beer consumed.
Pat,
I see someone says they have walleye in Kansas. If they did, and really eaten it – they would have posted Walleye is by far the best tasting fresh water fish on earth.
Two filets, cut at the gills up and down. Then run the knife back to the tail along the backbone. Flip the fish without removing the skin yet. Do same-same other side. Then cut the filet from each side.
You forgot about the fine trout fishing in the U.S. Pat. :)
There are also several varieties of bass, crappie and perch which make pretty good eating.
Also, the various coasts have many fine varieties of fish to catch and eat.
Bass is the most popular sporting fish in the U.S. When I lived in Texas, it seemed that every other house had a bass boat parked in their driveway. Not really, but there were a lot. :)
Channel Catfish are very tasty.
If you visit Wichita, go to a place called Fat Ernies. They have a catfish all you can eat night. I don’t recall what day it is on, been awhile since I’ve been there. Friday night maybe???
Pat,
We go to a place called Ghost River in Ontario. Big selection on types of water to fish. Always biting somewhere. It is remote though. Bears and moose in camp not unusual. The northern lights are gorgeous if you hit the right time of year.
Heard of Ghost River, to scared to go there though.
I was up near there one year in August, Perseid meteor shower, Northern Lights, and a Lunar Eclipse all at the same time!
Kansas,
I don’t mind catfish, as long as Cajun spices are all over em!
Hard to beat a good Bass, and Crappie/Bluegill are great – busy cleaning work for the little guys though.
You can fillet em, but like em scaled then just pan fried over the campfire with a couple of cold beers to round out the menu.
You know what a portage (sp) is Pat? With a boat? You drive to one lake or the camp. Motor to a land bar. Cross the land bar into a more remote lake, and sometimes portage even beyond to lakes rarely touched. You can see the rocks thirty feet down through the crystal clear water!
And on that socialized medicine helping the Canadian fish, that may explain why the fish counts are declining up there!
Couple years back, the Canadian wildlife service was on the lake I was, taking samples to find out why fish numbers were down.
Not sure why fish counts are down, but haven’t gone back since due to many reasons.
Goodnight ladies and gentlemen, exhausted and eye fatigue. :)
I’ve portaged a few times. Just like the Voyageurs! Not the window peekers, but the tough little guys with the canoes, bringing back beaver pelts from the Northwoods.
Man, they went thru a lot to get beavers back then.
Come to think of it, I guess we still do today!
Gnite Kansas.
Sounds like a good idea!
Well it’s good to find another fisherman Pat. Was good to read your posts. None of it had a cottin picking thing to do with the thread created herein, but no one in Kansas can follow a thread subject anyway.
Good we talked. I have to move along tonight. Will have to catch up with the fish stories another time. THis is as good a blog as any.
And I want to hear about Voyageurs!
Ran into some other guys on a portage once, canoe trip in Quetico park in Canada.
Guy ran into a bear! Gotta watch that on the portages.
Said he was in a very awkward position that morning in the woods – he was leaning against a tree taking a crap, when he saw a bear coming his way!
All he could do was play dead, so he bent over (still with his pants down) so his bear ass was up in the air pointing right at the bear!
The bear sniffed around him a little then took off.
Guess the bear didn’t know what to do with a bear ass! Probably never saw one without hair on it!
What was this thread about anyway?
See ya all. Remind me to tell the bear hunting joke sometime.
Ok, coast is clear, all the Libs can come out now!
Does anyone want to discuss the problem of illegal aliens or noton this thread?
some of you people really make me mad,you think the mexicans take your jobs .no they dont they take the jobs americans wont do,how many americans do you see out in the fields in 90 to100 degree heat.not very many if any at all.if you take away there jobs and make them go back to mexico usa will be loosing alot,crops wont get in on time.everything will be more expencive because of farmers loosing there crops.they are very hard working people .i say leave them alone let them stay .give them a chance to become legal.there only trying to do what everyone else is by making a living and taking care of there familys.
On September 27, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) announced that the DREAM Act would not be considered as an amendment to H.R. 1585, the Defense Department authorization bill for fiscal year 2008.
The Washington Times reports, however, that Reid will push for passage of the DREAM Act, which would grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens, by different means (possibly in its stand-alone form [S. 774, sponsored by Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin {D-Ill.}]) before the Senate adjourns for the year (i.e., on or about November 16).
Reid’s concession on the DoD authorization bill may doom other immigration-related amendments to the defense bill as well.
Please fax your senators: We have stopped the DREAM Act for now, but there is already a push to pass it as a stand-alone bill.
Senator Sam Brownback contact information- Taken from his web site
Office location Phone # Fax #Washington DC office 1-202-224-6521 1-202-228-1265Overland Park Office 1-913-492-6378 1-913-492-7253Topeka office 1-785-233-2503 1-785-233-2616Garden City office 1-620-231-6040 1-620-231-6347Wichita office 1-316-264-8066 1-316-264-9078
Senator Pat Roberts Contact Information Taken from his web site
Washington DC office 1-202-224-4774 1-202-224-3514Overland Park Office 1-913-451-9343 1-913-451-9446Topeka office 1-785-295-2745 1-785-235-3665Wichita office 1-316-263-0416 1-316-263-0273Dodge City Office 1-620-227-2244 1-620-227-2264
Representative Todd Tiahrt, Contact information taken from his web site
Wichita OfficeAddress: 155 North Market St.Suite 400Wichita, KS 67202Phone: 316.262.8992Fax: 316.262.5309Washington OfficeAddress: 2441 Rayburn BuildingWashington, DC 20515Phone: 202.225.6216Fax: 202.225.3489