Bush in Mexico for last stop on tour

Anything and Everything political, express your view, but play nice
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19658
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Bush in Mexico for last stop on tour

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

CNN lately (with the exception of Lou Dobbs) has used GWB's latest visit to Mexico to rehash the illegal immigration debacle. Not to my surprise, this morning they had a special where CNN correspondents interviewed "broken" families in Mexico who have no men in their household because they've jumped the boarder to Mexico.

One woman said all her sons and her husband are in America along with 20 of her relatives ... she said without the income from her family in America, they won't be able to live.

CNN used the above as a pawn, as if we should feel sorrow and at the same time relax our non-existent border policy because of these "unfortunate" people.

Am I being shallow when I say I don't care about their family, I don't care about their children, and I don't care what they have to say? Fact of the matter, they broke the law and the story ends, they have no opinion.

I'm sick of hearing people talk about the families and how we can't possibly be seen as "home-wreckers" because that wouldn't be "PC". It's time we start doing something rather then sit with our thumbs up our asses and watch Hillary talk about investigating Haliburton because their headquarters moved :roll: .
Bush in Mexico for last stop on tour
POSTED: 7:11 a.m. EDT, March 13, 2007

MERIDA, Mexico (AP) -- Mexican President Felipe Calderon has a tough message for U.S. President George W. Bush: The United States must do more -- "much more" -- to solve thorny issues of drug-trafficking and immigration.

At the last stop on his Latin American tour, Bush must convince Calderon on Tuesday that he is committed to soothing strained U.S.-Mexico relations, which got worse when Bush signed a law calling for construction of more than 700 miles (1,130 kilometers) of new fencing along the long border the two countries share.

Many Latin Americans see the fence as evidence that America is ripping up its welcome mat.

The welcome mat here for Bush's talks with Mexico's newly elected leader is muddied with anti-American sentiment, particularly over the war in Iraq.

Security is extremely tight in Merida, a city on Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula. Schools are closed. The area around the hotels where Bush and Calderon are staying is guarded by police and surrounded by metal barriers. Before Bush's arrival Monday evening, about 200 people marched through the streets, carrying Mexican flags and chanting "Bush is a murderer and he's not welcome!"

When he first became president, Bush promised that Latin America would vault to the top of his agenda. But after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the administration's focus was riveted on South Asia and the Middle East. That left many Mexicans feeling neglected by their northern neighbor, and some view Bush's trip as a case of too little, too late.

Bush and Calderon's two days of talks are meant to better the U.S.-Mexico relationship, not yield dramatic announcements. The two have some things in common. Both went to Harvard University in Boston, Massachusetts. Both are conservative and pro-business. Each wants to stem illegal immigration. Yet Calderon has a more studious and less charismatic personality than his predecessor Vicente Fox, who, like Bush, owned a ranch.

The two are expected to discuss port security and modernizing customs on both sides of the border to speed trade. Immigration and narcotrafficking -- an issue Bush thinks needs to be tackled regionally -- likely will dominate their discussions.

Bush's five-nation tour of Latin America is acting as a counterweight to Hugo Chavez, Venezuela's leftist leader who is carrying the flag for the leftward shift in Latin America. The Mexican leader has said he is not interested in being Bush's front man for battling Chavez's rising influence.

Calderon, a conservative who narrowly won the contested July election, is under pressure from a strong leftist opposition to alleviate poverty affecting half of Mexico's citizens, and refrain from being a subordinate to the more powerful United States.

Gerardo Fernandez, a spokesman for Mexico's leftist Democratic Revolution Party, arrived Monday in Merida with a bag of toy soldiers he wanted to leave at Bush's hotel so he could "play war and leave the world alone." When he could not get through security, he climbed a rusty metal barrier and threw the plastic troops into the secured area.

Brazil, Uruguay, Colombia and Guatemala were the first four stops on Bush's trip that began last week. He returns on Wednesday to Washington, reinvigorated to press Democrats and Republicans to overhaul U.S. immigration law. Bush is hoping that a measure will materialize by August -- before spending bills begin to crowd the legislative calendar.

The biggest hurdle, Bush said, is figuring out what to do with the 12 million illegal immigrants already in the United States. The president has proposed a guest worker plan that would allow legal employment for foreigners and give some illegals a shot at becoming American citizens. Critics say this rewards unlawful behavior.

"There will not be amnesty, automatic citizenship," Bush said Monday in Guatemala before a short flight to Mexico. "It's just not going to happen. Nor is it feasible to try to kick everybody out of our country. That's not possible. And so I'm going to work with members of both parties to find a rational middle ground." (Watch Bush explain how U.S. law works Video)

Calderon has lambasted the U.S. decision to build the new border fence -- a mix of physical barriers and high-tech virtual fencing. He likens it to the Berlin Wall, and argues that both countries need to improve Mexico's economy to lessen the desire to seek work in the United States.

Calderon also is critical of the Bush administration's efforts to stem the flow of drugs into the United States. The Mexican president says threats his administration has received from drug traffickers will not stop the government's nearly nationwide military crackdown, and he is calling on the United States to do more to help.

"We are, at the end of the day, putting our lives on the line in this battle, and the United States has to come up with something that is more than symbolic gestures, much more," Calderon said in an interview Saturday with The Associated Press.

"Mexico can't diminish the availability of drugs, while the U.S. hasn't reduced its demand."
Cityskier
Wanted Poster
Posts: 3165
Joined: Nov 8th, '04, 11:08
Location: NYC

Post by Cityskier »

you're one scary mofo
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19658
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

Cityskier wrote:you're one scary mofo
Which part?
Dr. NO
Signature Poster
Posts: 21422
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 05:52
Location: In the Baah!

Post by Dr. NO »

Cityskier wrote:you're one scary mofo
As compared to the rest of us?
MUST STOP POSTING ! MUST STOP POSTING !

Shut up and Ski!

Why's Everybody Always Pickin on Me?
St. Jerry
Powderhound
Posts: 1515
Joined: Nov 12th, '04, 17:59
Location: NYC

Post by St. Jerry »

Jabber, I'm with you on this one. As is Lou Dobbs.
Ron Paul 2012
Dr. NO
Signature Poster
Posts: 21422
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 05:52
Location: In the Baah!

Post by Dr. NO »

In Mass, they reported that Teddy Kennedy is demanding the names and locations of all the ILLEGALS removed from his state. He is also demanding that they be returned and monitored in Taxatwoshits rather than a federal holding area in Texas. Guess he is afraid he will lose the Illegal Immigrant vote if they are deported.
MUST STOP POSTING ! MUST STOP POSTING !

Shut up and Ski!

Why's Everybody Always Pickin on Me?
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19658
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

I have a feeling CS, DMC, JerseyGuy, and others probably have an issue with this statement, hence CS calling me "scary"
Am I being shallow when I say I don't care about their family, I don't care about their children, and I don't care what they have to say? Fact of the matter, they broke the law and the story ends, they have no opinion.
I don't think this makes me scary, it makes me a realist. What's the alternative?
Last edited by XtremeJibber2001 on Mar 14th, '07, 13:24, edited 1 time in total.
BigKahuna13
Site Admin
Posts: 6488
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:10
Location: Under the Boardwalk
Contact:

Post by BigKahuna13 »

a. This remains a huge effing non-issue.
b. A little compassion for others is a good thing.
What is not possible is not to choose. ~Jean-Paul Sartre


Image
JerseyGuy
Postinator
Posts: 6461
Joined: Feb 20th, '05, 12:10

Post by JerseyGuy »

XtremeJibber2001 wrote:I have a feeling CS, DMC, JerseyGuy, and others probably have an issue with this state, hence CS calling me "scary"
Am I being shallow when I say I don't care about their family, I don't care about their children, and I don't care what they have to say? Fact of the matter, they broke the law and the story ends, they have no opinion.
I don't think this makes me scary, it makes me a realist. What's the alternative?
Actually, I just appreciate irony. I only wish that your original post had juxtaposed:

Am I being shallow when I say I don't care about their family, I don't care about their children, and I don't care what they have to say? Fact of the matter, they broke the law and the story ends, they have no opinion.

with

Freedom is NORML

...more closely.
"Default on aug 3rd just like clown lips said."
-- Racist Maddie, finally revealing himself as the hateful racist that he really is


"The rest of your post is something my pathetic little mind can't even remotely fathom."
-- Racist Maddie: uncut, uncensored, unedited and unhinged


"when is JG gonna figure out that since i OWN HIM, there is no need to respond to him"
-- tellitlikeheiwishesitwas, stumbling into a new way to handle being publicly called out for lying: a clumsy duck and weave with a dollop of self-delusion


"blah blah Okemo is awesome blah"
-- SkippyShill, in an accidental moment of misplaced clarity


"Go f*** yourself."
-- StreetSkippy, who be hatin' on tha haters
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19658
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

BigKahuna13 wrote:a. This remains a huge effing non-issue.
b. A little compassion for others is a good thing.
It's not an issue because the Government isn't allowing it to become one, IMHO.

Compassion for those that broke the law? Why?
JerseyGuy wrote:Actually, I just appreciate irony.
I'm sure you do and considering your joke, it wouldn't surprise me the least that you'd prefer to leave our border wide-open.
BigKahuna13
Site Admin
Posts: 6488
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:10
Location: Under the Boardwalk
Contact:

Post by BigKahuna13 »

XtremeJibber2001 wrote:
BigKahuna13 wrote:a. This remains a huge effing non-issue.
b. A little compassion for others is a good thing.
It's not an issue because the Government isn't allowing it to become one, IMHO.

Compassion for those that broke the law? Why?
You say that as if motivations didn't matter. They do. Stealing a loaf of bread because you're starving and stealing a loaf of bread just because it's funny to get over the guy who owns the grocery store are not the same thing.

As to whether it's an issue or not. Exactly what problem are we solving? Exactly how much money are we going to save? Exactly what benefit do we derive and exactly what costs do we incur.

No one has quantified any of that. It's all speculation and guess work.
What is not possible is not to choose. ~Jean-Paul Sartre


Image
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19658
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

BigKahuna13 wrote:
XtremeJibber2001 wrote:
BigKahuna13 wrote:a. This remains a huge effing non-issue.
b. A little compassion for others is a good thing.
It's not an issue because the Government isn't allowing it to become one, IMHO.

Compassion for those that broke the law? Why?
You say that as if motivations didn't matter. They do. Stealing a loaf of bread because you're starving and stealing a loaf of bread just because it's funny to get over the guy who owns the grocery store are not the same thing.

As to whether it's an issue or not. Exactly what problem are we solving? Exactly how much money are we going to save? Exactly what benefit do we derive and exactly what costs do we incur.

No one has quantified any of that. It's all speculation and guess work.
It's stealing no matter which way you want to slice it.

I personally feel it's an issue.

Someone is blatantly breaking the law and the government is allowing these people to do so. This alone should concern everyone.

Why should an illegal alien be allowed to break the law, but I'm fined, sent to court, and possibly jail if I break the law? Is this fair? Is this acceptable?

Even more importantly, there is no record of these people, thus a potential security risk.

Something I found via Google really quick. Didn't check how authoritative this source is.
http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html wrote:
Households headed by illegal aliens imposed more than $26.3 billion in costs on the federal government in 2002 and paid only $16 billion in taxes, creating a net fiscal deficit of almost $10.4 billion, or $2,700 per illegal household.

Among the largest costs are Medicaid ($2.5 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches ($1.9 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion).

With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services.

On average, the costs that illegal households impose on federal coffers are less than half that of other households, but their tax payments are only one-fourth that of other households.

Many of the costs associated with illegals are due to their American-born children, who are awarded U.S. citizenship at birth. Thus, greater efforts at barring illegals from federal programs will not reduce costs because their citizen children can continue to access them.

If illegal aliens were given amnesty and began to pay taxes and use services like households headed by legal immigrants with the same education levels, the estimated annual net fiscal deficit would increase from $2,700 per household to nearly $7,700, for a total net cost of $29 billion.

Costs increase dramatically because unskilled immigrants with legal status -- what most illegal aliens would become -- can access government programs, but still tend to make very modest tax payments.

Although legalization would increase average tax payments by 77 percent, average costs would rise by 118 percent.

The fact that legal immigrants with few years of schooling are a large fiscal drain does not mean that legal immigrants overall are a net drain -- many legal immigrants are highly skilled.

The vast majority of illegals hold jobs. Thus the fiscal deficit they create for the federal government is not the result of an unwillingness to work.

The results of this study are consistent with a 1997 study by the National Research Council, which also found that immigrants' education level is a key determinant of their fiscal impact.
2knees
Poster Child Poster
Posts: 2192
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 13:34

Post by 2knees »

yeah the punishment fit the crime here. You can honestly say its ok to pull a mother out of a factory and ship her to texas without one iota of thought given to where her children were supposed to go? you honestly dont care? sorry but in this case, you cant just apply your tried and true method of "this is right therefor that is wrong" black and white thinking.

the irony is almost too much to take in the fact that:

Authorities allege Insolia oversaw sweatshop conditions so he could meet the demands of $91 million in U.S. military contracts.
BigKahuna13
Site Admin
Posts: 6488
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:10
Location: Under the Boardwalk
Contact:

Post by BigKahuna13 »

XtremeJibber2001 wrote:
BigKahuna13 wrote:
XtremeJibber2001 wrote:
BigKahuna13 wrote:a. This remains a huge effing non-issue.
b. A little compassion for others is a good thing.
It's not an issue because the Government isn't allowing it to become one, IMHO.

Compassion for those that broke the law? Why?
You say that as if motivations didn't matter. They do. Stealing a loaf of bread because you're starving and stealing a loaf of bread just because it's funny to get over the guy who owns the grocery store are not the same thing.

As to whether it's an issue or not. Exactly what problem are we solving? Exactly how much money are we going to save? Exactly what benefit do we derive and exactly what costs do we incur.

No one has quantified any of that. It's all speculation and guess work.
It's stealing no matter which way you want to slice it.

I personally feel it's an issue.

Someone is blatantly breaking the law and the government is allowing these people to do so. This alone should concern everyone.

Why should an illegal alien be allowed to break the law, but I'm fined, sent to court, and possibly jail if I break the law? Is this fair? Is this acceptable?

Even more importantly, there is no record of these people, thus a potential security risk.

Something I found via Google really quick. Didn't check how authoritative this source is.
You blantently break the law everytime you light up. The government allows you to because they really don't enforce the marijuana laws.

So why is it okay for you to ignore the law, but not for our hungry bread thief??
What is not possible is not to choose. ~Jean-Paul Sartre


Image
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19658
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

2knees wrote:yeah the punishment fit the crime here. You can honestly say its ok to pull a mother out of a factory and ship her to texas without one iota of thought given to where her children were supposed to go? you honestly dont care? sorry but in this case, you cant just apply your tried and true method of "this is right therefor that is wrong" black and white thinking.
With regret, yes it's OK to pull a mother out of a factory and ship her to TX. Why? Did this mother know she broke the law? Did she understand the risks? She took a risk and her child suffers because of this. This isn't the United States responsibility, it's the parents.

Lets look at another example.

We have a US Citizen mother who has decided to transport crack in her child's diaper. Is this mother going to be let off the hook like the illegal alien mother because she has a child? The child will end up in protected services in both cases. Ironically, also in both cases, both mothers put their child at risk and that's no ones fault but their own.

Do I honestly not care? Of course not, but I feel the law should be fair and at least consistent across all matters (Keep in mind, these people took the risk themselves, no one forced them to illegally enter our nation). As you can see from above, you're telling me that it's OK the illegal alien gets a "pass", but the American citizen doesn't get a "pass". This is problematic as you undoubtedly can see.
BigKahuna13 wrote:You blantently break the law everytime you light up. The government allows you to because they really don't enforce the marijuana laws.
They do enforce the marijuana laws.

In fact, the last I looked, the gov't spends billions upon billions of dollars fighting marijuana transport, import/export, and use. It's a broken program and it's another thing that drives me nuts. It's more money wasted on a relatively ineffective government programs. Although I must admit, they spend more money fighting drugs then they do to close the border. I'm no rocket scientist, but I'm willing to bet if they sealed the border, the Federal Agencies would have much better success rates in fighting illegal drugs.
BigKahuna13 wrote: So why is it okay for you to ignore the law, but not for our hungry bread thief??
Why is it OK for you to speed? Why is it OK for you to jaywalk?

We could go on for days with "what if's", but this is how I see it:

- Illegals are crossing the boarder and not being prosecuted, this is clear. A protest of thousands of illegals took to the streets and were not prosecuted. How many pot smoking hippies would be arrested? All of them, because that's what happened at a US university.

- Illegals are undocumented. No SS, no valid drivers license, they're ghosts. It's hard to track how much they're costing the taxpayers because they're so many of them and little documentation attached to them.

- Several illegals can repeatedly break the law, be deported to Mexico, let go "free", and then return to the US. An illegal was arrested recently in Hazleton, PA for murdering someone, this person was deported and arrested 8 times before this murder.

- Illegal aliens are a liability. Not only are they a burden to tax payers, but they're also a security risk.

- Illegal aliens can cross the boarder and get into the US with little to no issues, while law abiding citizens coming from Europe or Asia have to wait years to be admitted. Come to Drexel U in Philly sometime, I can sit you down with a few of my immigrant friends and you can tell them they're sh1t-out-of-luck.

What I'd really like to see is the border sealed ... we can worry about the socioeconomic issue when the time comes. C'mon though, at least close the border ... I'm sure no one disagrees with that.
Post Reply