Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home Register FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 10-07-2010, 11:39 AM   #61
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,703
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
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.
I believe deportation is a likely option, but not mandatory. Don't civil offenders go before an immigration judge who ultimately decides their fate? They could be deported, told to leave or given a stay for hardship...

Quote:
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.
It's certainly mudslinging, no doubt about that. Dirty and underhanded? Probably...but also high quality stuff

But it also does highlight the issue, that many while standing for stronger laws on illegal immigration also benefit from it. Another report just out alleges Lou Dobbs has the same conflict.

At least Colin Powell had the stones to just come out and say it.

-spence
spence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2010, 11:42 AM   #62
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,252
The maid entered the country illegally, which if she was trying to build a better life and was not breaking any other laws, is somehitng we can all relate to.

However, she also obtained someone else's social security number, and claimed that as her own. That's another crime.

Furthermore, this woman (the illegal) is now letting political operative sattack her former employer. The Whitmans paid her $23 an hour, which is triple the minimum wage. This is how she pays back the Whitmans, by trying to derail her campaign?
Jim in CT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2010, 07:03 PM   #63
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
I believe deportation is a likely option, but not mandatory. Don't civil offenders go before an immigration judge who ultimately decides their fate? They could be deported, told to leave or given a stay for hardship...

As we all know from many high profile cases, whether or not someone is actually guilty, nothing is mandatory until the judge says it is. Getting the "right judge" can make all the difference. That's not the point in this discussion. What little we know is what has been reported. From that information (all that is available for this discussion), there is nothing that warrants anything but deportation for this illegal alien. What a particular judge with his/her particular bias, agenda, ethnic/racial/religious background (which seems more pertinent than blind justice nowadays in politically charged cases) will do (whether even if she will be charged given the current reluctance to go after these cases) is uncertain.

It's certainly mudslinging, no doubt about that. Dirty and underhanded? Probably...but also high quality stuff

Bravo! High quality dirt. Exactly what the public needs to decide who wins its vote. Alinsky would approve.

But it also does highlight the issue, that many while standing for stronger laws on illegal immigration also benefit from it. Another report just out alleges Lou Dobbs has the same conflict.
-spence
That illegal immigration benefits many (lower wages for employers/lower prices for consumers, etc. . .) is not some new "issue" that needs highlighting. Nor is it highlighted in this case. The Whitman's were not paying low wages, and the "issue" is using the woman as high quality dirt to influence an election.

I don't know about Lou Dobbs "conflict." Is someone slinging high quality mud at him? Does it concern the voters of California? The fact that many, if not most of us, not just Dobbs, Whitman, or whoever is fortunate enough to get "reported," benefit in some way from illegals is irrelevent to the illegality and the HARM it does to us as a nation. It is wiser to give up small gains that lead to large destruction.
detbuch is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright 2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com