Another - you cant make this up

[spence]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

not true, most americans immigrated here legally. How can you say most would do the same thing?

You misread the point, which is, that if you were born and grew up as she did, you would likely come to the US illegally if you thought it was the best way to get ahead because of limited opportunities at home.

-spence

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by spence

You misread the point, which is, that if you were born and grew up as she did, you would likely come to the US illegally if you thought it was the best way to get ahead because of limited opportunities at home.

-spence

Hmm, like my great grandmother who grew up in a famine in Poland? Or my grandfather growing up in the slums of Lebanon?
Or how about my wifes parents, her Dad was an indentured servant living in India? Her house had no refrigeration and no inside plumbing.
Hmm, I wonder why they all came here legally? But I bet thats all not nearly as hard as she had it in Mexico. I wonder if that mentality of taking the easy road, sneaking in, falsifying documents, lying, cheating, I wonder if that makes you a stronger citizen vs. the hard way of coming here legally, demonstrating hard work and perseverance to your children, friends, neighbors. Which one leads to a better America?

[spence]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

Hmm, like my great grandmother who grew up in a famine in Poland? Or my grandfather growing up in the slums of Lebanon?
Or how about my wifes parents, her Dad was an indentured servant living in India? Her house had no refrigeration and no inside plumbing.
Hmm, I wonder why they all came here legally? But I bet thats all not nearly as hard as she had it in Mexico. I wonder if that mentality of taking the easy road, sneaking in, falsifying documents, lying, cheating, I wonder if that makes you a stronger citizen vs. the hard way of coming here legally, demonstrating hard work and perseverance to your children, friends, neighbors. Which one leads to a better America?

You don't think many would prefer to come here legally if they could?

I think the challenge for someone like the subject of this thread is that unless you have a family connection or can show that your job skills are in high demand it can take many years to be approved if ever. I've also seen some reports that the true cost (in $$$) can be quite prohibitive.

That certainly doesn't justify the behavior, but I don't think you can compare it to other situations which may or may not be equitable. We don't really know her true motivation for coming to the USA, and immigration policy has changed a lot over the past century reflecting (and shaping) many trends.

From what we see about drug violence and the trafficking of immigrants across the border, it certainly doesn't look like it's the "easy road" to me. More justification for better border security and prosecution of business that hire illegal workers.

Remember, to try and understand why someone would come here illegally doesn't mean your seeking to legitimize it.

-spence

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

I figured it was tongue in cheek , almost funny too.

I'll take that as a compliment.

You're all for better control, except for those that want a better life?

Never said that.

Then perhaps she should apply for legal immigration status and legally enter this country. Do you think immigrants that come through breaking our laws to get in generally will be law abiding citizens after some kind of amnesty?

Amnesty is a tricky subject. There's a very good case against it, but there's also the 12M illegals already here. Doesn't seem feasible to round them all up and the economic fallout could be serious.

While we all hear of the exceptions in the news, I'd venture a guess most generally obey the law outside of being here illegally.

Sorry, I just have an issue with people breaking the laws and then being given wrist slaps at best.

The punishment should fit the crime, hence the AZ law change to make it criminal to be here without a valid status...so they can round 'em up and deport them which is difficult to do today for people who have been in the US for a long period of time.

I do think this is an area for the law to be more clear, it seems like an immigration judge has a lot of room to decide someone's fate. Regardless, I believe this should be in the Federal domain.

I think our biggest problem with immigration is that we do not get enough of the best and brightest that come here legally and retain them. Instead, half the elected government turns and looks the other way for the main influx of immigrants we have. But as a country, we stopped looking forward to improve ourselves and instead became the baby sitter.

Post 9/11 changes certainly seem to have impacted education and employment. Many IT business leaders have been very vocal about this.

"I don't think she could be charged under this section of code as she's already here..."

Law no longer applies. Nice.

No, it's just not the applicable part of the code.

-spence

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Americans (the U.S. kind) are more prone to change conditions in their country to their benefit rather than illegally migrating to another country. This country was founded by that type of revolution. There have been many revolutions south of the border. Perhaps they should keep trying till they get it right so their citizens don't have to leave. I hear they have some places that are amenable to the poor, like Cuba or Venezuala--good health care, everyone has a job or is taken care of. Those would be good models for the downtrodden to follow rather than risking everything to illegally sneak into such an ungrateful, oppressive, and selfish place like the U.S. Even Canada would be better, no?

I don't think revolutions are easy or spontaneous. They require the right combination of conditions at the right time. With the inherent corruption and poverty present in many countries, I can see how a more selfish solution might be attractive to some.

Although, with the natural resources, workforce and expanding business south of the border, it will be interesting to see how the economies and people respond over the next few decades.

Which moral implications and whose morality? A great deal of the moral implications that resulted in U.S. law, it is said, derived from Judeo/Christian morality. But that morality also includes much tough love. The god of that morality can be very harsh with those who steal and and break the law. That morality does not preach salvation by government, but by personal conduct and personal charity.

It's unfortunate that God chose to filter his morality through us imperfect people. (Note: This may not apply to those fortunate enough to speak directly to God.)

I've heard that "saying" in North America as well. But "getting by" is vague, and when referring to criminal getting by, there is the implication that, if you're caught, nice try but you'll pay the penalty.

Definitely a slippery slope there, but I'd think it's also why immigration issues are handled as both criminal and civil elements of Federal law.

One of the changes that Americans made was to provide for starving children--traditionally, much of that was done (and still is) by charity, but we've even legislated for such provisions. So it is not necessary to steal to feed starving children.

Agree, sometimes it does take a village

Does Whitman's illegal ex-maid have children?

Not sure but from what I gather she cleans a mean house.

-spence

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

I don't think revolutions are easy or spontaneous. They require the right combination of conditions at the right time.

The same applies to illegally entering and staying in the U.S.--as you replied to Jimmy "it certainly doesn't look like it's the easy road to me."

But the 12 to 20 to 30 million illegals certainly could have joined with the oppressed masses they left behind to follow some glorious leader like Chavez or Castro to create a workers paradise back home instead of the quiet revolution of cheap labor in the U.S.

With the inherent corruption and poverty present in many countries, I can see how a more selfish solution might be attractive to some.

All political solutions are selfish.

Although, with the natural resources, workforce and expanding business south of the border, it will be interesting to see how the economies and people respond over the next few decades.

If we stop the illegal immigration, the economies and people will be forced to "respond." By allowing it, it provides the safety valve which allows the backward situations to perpetuate.

It's unfortunate that God chose to filter his morality through us imperfect people. (Note: This may not apply to those fortunate enough to speak directly to God.)

Sounds like maybe you spoke to god to know what he chose?

I would guess that it is that very imperfection which requires a moral compass. Perfection needs nothing else.

Then, again, what is a perfect person other than a god of sorts . . . or a Spence?

By the way, you didn't say to which moral implications or whose morality you referred.

Definitely a slippery slope there, but I'd think it's also why immigration issues are handled as both criminal and civil elements of Federal law.

Massive illegal immigration is not merely an "issue," but a major problem that affects the states, cities, "villages", and individuals in this country. Though immigration is in the purview of the Federal Government, it does not have the resources to handle it alone. It would require tens of thousands of new agents to be hired. Whereas, the assistance of local law enforcement provides a ready force that can assist in identifying illegals in the process of routine stops. This has already been done and agencies have been created for this to occur. It has manifestly been the intent of Congress, through its creation of those agencies that state and local entities are meant to assist. That the Feds are resisting implies to me that they are either protecting turf, which is odious considering they have stolen so much turf from the states, or else the current administration does not want to effectively stop illegal immigration.

Agree, sometimes it does take a village :-spence

"Villagers" should have the local authority to impose various local ordinances and even to choose their version of health insurance. The Federal Government was not created to be a local village, but to protect the diverse villages from foreign invasions, even invasions such as massive illegal immigration. And the villagers should be allowed to detain and hand over such illegals to the subservient Federal Government. But it seems that some top-down politicians like to use populist phrases like "it takes a village" but, in reality, they don't trust the villagers, and they really mean "it takes a central control of the villages."

[scottw]

hilarious

Originally Posted by spence

You misread the point, which is, that if you were born and grew up as she did, you would likely come to the US illegally if you thought it was the best way to get ahead because of limited opportunities at home.

-spence

Originally Posted by spence
That's not the point. I'm all for better control of our borders, but from her perspective...she was just trying to make a better life.

spence[/QUOTE]
a housekeeper who's here simply to improve her life pretty low on the list.





spence[/QUOTE]
We don't really know her true motivation for coming to the USA

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by scottw

spence

a housekeeper who's here simply to improve her life pretty low on the list.


spence[/QUOTE]
We don't really know her true motivation for coming to the USA[/QUOTE]


That was her ploy. get a job working for Meg "Buy the election" Whitman, THEN set up a sleeper cell. of course! case cracked!

[scottw]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

a housekeeper who's here simply to improve her life pretty low on the list.


spence

We don't really know her true motivation for coming to the USA[/QUOTE]


That was her ploy. get a job working for Meg "Buy the election" Whitman, THEN set up a sleeper cell. of course! case cracked![/QUOTE]



guess I should have provided the entire quote(contradiction) so as not to confuse the brilliant global warming scientists

"I think the challenge for someone like the subject of this thread is that unless you have a family connection or can show that your job skills are in high demand it can take many years to be approved if ever. I've also seen some reports that the true cost (in $$$) can be quite prohibitive.

That certainly doesn't justify the behavior, but I don't think you can compare it to other situations which may or may not be equitable. We don't really know her true motivation for coming to the USA,

oh but we do!
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
You misread the point, which is, that if you were born and grew up as she did, you would likely come to the US illegally if you thought it was the best way to get ahead because of limited opportunities at home.

-spence

Originally Posted by spence
That's not the point. I'm all for better control of our borders, but from her perspective...she was just trying to make a better life.

spence[/QUOTE]
a housekeeper who's here simply to improve her life pretty low on the list.
and immigration policy has changed a lot over the past century reflecting (and shaping) many trends."


stupidity like this is why we can't get anything done on immigration:

"That was her ploy. get a job working for Meg "Buy the election" Whitman, THEN set up a sleeper cell. of course! case cracked!"

she either can't be blamed for trying to improve her life or you are equating her with a terrorist if you suggest she shouldn't be here...

[The Dad Fisherman]

Although her motivation may have been honorable to her, the law is the law and she, just like myself and everybody else in this country, needs to abide by it.

She broke it so now she must take the consequences that come with it.

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Although her motivation may have been honorable to her, the law is the law and she, just like myself and everybody else in this country, needs to abide by it.

She broke it so now she must take the consequences that come with it.

Rubber duck just fell from the ceiling...

[The Dad Fisherman]

It is amazing how the obvious escapes people

[JohnR]

yep

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Although her motivation may have been honorable to her, the law is the law and she, just like myself and everybody else in this country, needs to abide by it.

She broke it so now she must take the consequences that come with it.

I don't think anyone is arguing that she shouldn't be held accountable.

The context of the thread is RIJIMMY thinking she should be immediately dragged to the border in shackles. These aren't the consequences that typically accompany her violation.

-spence

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

These aren't the consequences that typically accompany her violation.

-spence

These are the consequences and this is what should happen to her if found guilty.

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

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 place other 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.

Violations are punishable by criminal fines and imprisonment for up to six months. Repeat offenses can bring up to two years in prison. Additional civil fines may be imposed at the discretion of immigration judges, but civil fines do not negate the criminal sanctions or nature of the offense.

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by spence

The context of the thread is RIJIMMY thinking she should be immediately dragged to the border in shackles. These aren't the consequences that typically accompany her violation.

-spence

No, I just want her arrested. But instead she is being paraded around by liberals trying to use her as a political pawn. And to top it off, as I highlighted in the initial post, latinos are now putting up 5 million for adds against Whitman! So how does that help their cause? Now wealthy people will think twice before hiring anyone of latin decent, it will BACKFIRE on them!

[spence]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

No, I just want her arrested. But instead she is being paraded around by liberals trying to use her as a political pawn.

Tis the season.

And to top it off, as I highlighted in the initial post, latinos are now putting up 5 million for adds against Whitman!

She doesn't serve their interests.

So how does that help their cause? Now wealthy people will think twice before hiring anyone of latin decent, it will BACKFIRE on them!

I doubt it, unless there's a flood of legal workers out to perform low skilled labor people will still hire who they can get regardless.

-spence

[RIJIMMY]

[
I doubt it, unless there's a flood of legal workers out to perform low skilled labor people will still hire who they can get regardless.

-spence[/QUOTE]

At $27 an hour, would you rather flip burgers?

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

These are the consequences and this is what should happen to her if found guilty.

We discussed this earlier in the thread. I don't think this part of the code is applicable to her situation. The laws appear to delineate between those trying to get over the border, those who just recently crossed the border and those who have been here some time.

Sort of like meteor, meteorite and meteoroid

-spence

[justplugit]

Amazing to me how some have so much empathy for illegal immigrants
who can come here legally if they choose, and so little empathy for the ones
who wait on line to take their turn to come legally.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

We discussed this earlier in the thread. I don't think this part of the code is applicable to her situation. The laws appear to delineate between those trying to get over the border, those who just recently crossed the border and those who have been here some time.

Sort of like meteor, meteorite and meteoroid

-spence

Are you saying there is a statute of limitations attached to this that equals the length of time it takes you to get way with it and enter the country

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

Enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other 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;

[RIJIMMY]

nevermind using false documentation

so - we know the Whitmans produced tax forms

Do we know if the illegal paid taxes? What SS # would she use? The fake one she gave the whitmans?

I bet she is guilty of immigrating illegally, using false documentation AND tax evasion. Now does she deserve to be arrested?

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Are you saying there is a statute of limitations attached to this that equals the length of time it takes you to get way with it and enter the country

I'd venture a guess that it has more to do with the fact that if someone has been here for some time, there's likely no evidence that they violated that specific section of code. I'm not an immigration attorney, but everything I've read indicates that simply being here without a visa is a civil offense under Federal law.

-spence

[spence]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

nevermind using false documentation

so - we know the Whitmans produced tax forms

Do we know if the illegal paid taxes? What SS # would she use? The fake one she gave the whitmans?

I bet she is guilty of immigrating illegally, using false documentation AND tax evasion. Now does she deserve to be arrested?

I believe illegals contribute quite a bit to SS without receiving any benefits. Many also seem to pay taxes...I don't think the IRS really cares who sends them money.

What I do find interesting though, is that your animosity is directed entirely at the house cleaner, and not at the billionaire who received her services for what looks like 6 years after she likely knew the woman's status was suspect.

-spence

[Fishpart]

Originally Posted by spence

I believe illegals contribute quite a bit to SS without receiving any benefits. Many also seem to pay taxes...I don't think the IRS really cares who sends them money.

Emphasis on SEEM to pay taxes. They claim a rediculous number of dependents (I have heard 10 or so) and figure the microscopic little that gets witheld is price of admission to get their children and unwed spouse free stuff... Don't forget Auntie Zituni

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

I'd venture a guess that it has more to do with the fact that if someone has been here for some time, there's likely no evidence that they violated that specific section of code. I'm not an immigration attorney, but everything I've read indicates that simply being here without a visa is a civil offense under Federal law.

-spence

Not having proper documentation is some evidence that they have violated that section of the code. And it is certain evidence that some part of the code has been violated. The civil offense of being here without a visa is also subject to deportation. Even overstaying your visa faces you with removal proceedings to be deported from the U.S. If you overstay your visa for more than 180 days but less than a year you will face deportation and be inadmissible to the U.S. for three years. If you overstay it for more than a year, you will be inadmissible for 10 years. Not having a visa, a green card, or proper immigration papers is evidence of your breaking immigration law and makes you subject to deportation.

The woman Whitman fired, if the code is to be enforced, should be deported.

If it can be proved that Whitman did something illegal, she should be prosecuted. If not, it's typical oxymoronic dirty politics, and the voters should decide on the merits of the candidates' policies, not on mudslinging distractions.

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by detbuch

If not, it's typical oxymoronic dirty politics, and the voters should decide on the merits of the candidates' policies, not on mudslinging distractions.

Yup, same old, same old politics.

If you can't win on your record snow them with

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by spence

What I do find interesting though, is that your animosity is directed entirely at the house cleaner, and not at the billionaire who received her services for what looks like 6 years after she likely knew the woman's status was suspect.

-spence

Spence, you need a little common sense, seriously.
Its pretty well documented that thr Whitmans had all the correct documentation from the housekeeper. The agency had all the right documents from the housekeeper. When the Whitmans received the letter that the SSN may have a problem, the letter was full of legal disclaimers saying this this is not an indication of any issues. The husband wrote a note and had the housekeeper look into it. I've read that imiigration attorneys siad there was not much more the WHitmans could have done. So you say "she likely knew", this is the common sense part.......Whitman was running a multi-million dollar company, I'd guess shes traveling 20 days out of the month? So, you really think she "likely" knew? In her spare time she pondered the citizenship of her HOUSEKEEPER???? The Whitmans did everything by the book, everything.
The housekeeper, illiegally entered the country, falsified documentation, and lied to her employer. She was subsequently fired and is now suing her employer.
Yes, I am faulting the housekeeper, she is a CRIMINAL.
Hell, I had a buddy get caught with a fake id when he was 18 and it caused tons of legal issues for him, this lady looks to be the vicitim and so far has not been charged. Incredible.

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

Amazing to me how some have so much empathy for illegal immigrants
who can come here legally if they choose, and so little empathy for the ones
who wait on line to take their turn to come legally.

I think your assumption that immigrants choose to come here illegally (while legal options are readily available) isn't really true, not at least for the bulk of unskilled workers who enter the country to perform lower skilled work. There are quotas for these categories of applicants and very few are actually approved each year. Not to mention the cost which can be quite prohibitive.

Rightly so, the process doesn't want to take just anybody. A good question might be if the quotas are aligned with the demand. I've read that they are not, but don't know for sure. I've also read that in a few decades we may actually be trying to entice low skilled workers into the USA to keep the economy moving.

-spence

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

There are quotas for these categories of applicants and very few are actually approved each year. Not to mention the cost which can be quite prohibitive.

Maybe the Quotas would be higher if there were more jobs readily available for unskilled worker....if the bulk of these jobs weren't already being performed by people who came here illegally.

Originally Posted by spence

I've also read that in a few decades we may actually be trying to entice low skilled workers into the USA to keep the economy moving.

-spence

Entice Away...if the economy dictates that we need to increase our demand for Unskilled immigrant workers then the government might actually decrease all the red tape that is needed to enter the country. Wouldn't that make it easier for people to enter legally....the illegals may be shooting themselves in the foot by bypassing the system.