Cindy Sheehan is illegal; she has broken the law

[proud2BlibKansan]

She has been arrested how many times in the past year?

At the State of the Union address
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/31/sheehan.arrest/

In Washington in September
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/26/AR2005092600143.html

In New York
http://www.democrats.com/node/6184

At the UN
http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/47/18190

Her sister was arrested along with 12 other people in April in Texas
http://www.michaelmoore.com/mustread/index.php?id=632

And there were also arrests at Thanksgiving
http://crawfordupdate.blogspot.com/

This post is for all the DUers who are hyperventilating over the fact that the undocumented workers in this country are ILLEGAL. So is Cindy Sheehan. So is Daniel Ellsberg. So is Diane Wilson.

It's called civil disobedience. Sometimes it is necessary to save a life or to save our country. So every single time I see one of you going nuts over these undocumented workers who, in your words, are ILLEGAL, I am going to assume you don't support Cindy Sheehan or Daniel Ellsberg or Diane Wilson.

[ulysses]

1. but, you see,

civil disobedience is only legal for American citizens.

:crazy:

[proud2BlibKansan]

3. Oh thanks for pointing that out

NOW I get it!

:sarcasm:

[ulysses]

5. they only keep me around

for the clarity I provide. :D

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. LOL

:rofl:

[Kutjara]

2. In my experience, people use words like 'illegal'...

...so they have an excuse to switch their brains off. Many moral and ethical issues are thorny and difficult to pin down. Even worse, taking a moral or ethical position may necessitate discomfort, hardship or personal change. Change is scary for many people. Much easier to lump all 'illegal' things into a single category that can be discounted without examination.

Of course, the State is happy to oblige, by categorising many of the things we should be thinking carefully about (drugs, immigration, poverty, political dissent) as 'illegal.' thereby absolving us of the need to think about them at all.

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. It's a republican technique

and oh so disappointing to see right here on DU. And I am about over it.

[evlbstrd]

7. Then I'm illegal.

To a native American, all Europeans are illegal.
Please, deport me to Ireland. I'm begging here.

[proud2BlibKansan]

9. I am going with you

I hear the Guinness is lots better over there.

[evlbstrd]

35. I heard that, too.

To which tribe do we surrender?

[proud2BlibKansan]

45. I have always liked the Sioux

[evlbstrd]

Road trip!

Actually, that could be a very interesting symbolic gesture. Wanna try it?
We could ask Mabus what she thinks.

[proud2BlibKansan]

95. No don't

She would just tell us to surrender to her since she is Native American. It will be more fun to do a road trip to somewhere farther than Lawrence.

[evlbstrd]

121. You're right.

We'd just end up doing her yardwork and painting her house.
Dakotas?

[proud2BlibKansan]

123. ND - yes SD - no

[Ladyhawk]

169. So should 7/8ths of me surrender to the other 1/8th?

I wouldn't even have to make a road trip. :)

[Viva_La_Revolution]

190. lucky you! 9/10ths of me would have to leave the country. nt

[evlbstrd]

87. Fat fingered dupe.

[uppityperson]

189. Lakota Dakota Nakota please, not "souix"

[guinivere]

72. I have a Mohican friend. Or I know a couple of Cherokee.

They'll be at the bar later. We could have a couple of drinkies with them, surrender and blow this pop stand.

[evlbstrd]

85. Would you mind inquiring about the possibility?

Maybe the ACLU could get involved.

[Ladyhawk]

171. This would actually be pretty interesting.

Do I get to keep 1/8th of my possessions since I'm roughly 1/8th Cherokee? (I don't know the exact percentage...some input from both sides of the family.)

[evlbstrd]

206. I don't know why not.

And there's a nice little mountain in Kilkenny with my family name on it.

[northofdenali]

103. ...

:popcorn::rofl::popcorn:

[treestar]

128. Take me with you!

[pitohui]

8. way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory

so now we have to support slave labor or you assume we don't support sheehan?

that is truly truly counter-productive

may an undocumented worker who works for half price take YOUR job and your wife's job and your child's job and future

the democratic party is NOTHING if we are not against the exploitation of the worker and opposed to scabs of every race, if we say being a scab is OK if you are born in the "right" place well that's damn racist isn't it? but anything to deny the black man a job, i suppose

i will give you a clue train -- if you want to help GOP CEO's hire slaves and nannies at slave wages, join the GOP since you are supporting THEIR platform

does sheehan know you think her actions support illegals crossing our borders and undercutting the wages of our citizens? i highly doubt it

at least in real life, people are honest, they frankly say the reason they support illegal immigration is because "n-words" are lazy, give me the honest racist any day than the backdoor holier than thou racist who pretends to be oh-so-concerned abt the poor pitiful hispanics when his real interest is to undercut wages for the people who were born here and have nowhere else to go

[proud2BlibKansan]

12. Cindy is in complete support of the rights of undocumented workers

We don't support slave labor. We want to improve working conditions for ALL workers. We also realize that no one has lost their job because an undocumented worker swooped in and took it away. They were hired by employers who are more than willing to violate federal labor laws just to make a buck.

The enemy is the employer, NOT the worker.

Watch this video and you will understand why this is such an important distinction.

Dr. Joseph Lowrey at Camp Casey:
http://www.truthout.org/easterincrawford.shtml

[Sterling]

160. The enemy is both.

It takes two to tango.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

39. Another divisive post. Wonderful.

[lumberjack_jeff]

132. But the OP, apparently, is not. n/t

[treestar]

130. When our ancestors did this labor, the worst they dealt with

was snobbery or "no Irish need apply."

Takes modern people to be so nasty as to cleverly add in making it illegal for you to be here.

at least when our ancestors started up unions, they weren't going to be deported for it.

no illegal alien has ever taken any job from me or my family. I'm sorry if yours is still at the bottom rung, but you have to compete with immigrant labor just like the ancestors of those snobby wasps did.

[Sterling]

159. Yes this thread is based on a rather stupid analogy

I don't really have much else to say, it's kind of a waste of time, I think I just wasted 30 secs of my life posting this because this thread is useless in terms of constructive discussion.

[tjwash]

204. OH NO!!! The Mexicans are coming to take my job.

:eyes:

[NNN0LHI]

10. It used to be illegal to help slaves escape to freedom n/t

[proud2BlibKansan]

13. So was throwing that tea in Boston Harbor

[treestar]

133. And doing business without Stamps - 1765

[mondo joe]

25. That's what abortion bombers say too.

You might mind the "company" you keep.

[proud2BlibKansan]

34. I am very proud of my company at Camp Casey

Have you been there? Do you support Cindy?

[mondo joe]

43. I do support her. Do you support abortion clinic bombers?

They feel justified in breaking laws too.

[proud2BlibKansan]

48. They are murderers

Cindy has not harmed anyone. Neither have the undocumented workers.

[mondo joe]

64. Abortion clinic bombers use the same arguments you do.

It was illegal to hide slaves.

And those who don't bomb clinic but trick women into fake clinics do it too. Anti choicers who prevent women from getting abortions use it too.

You want to use their arguments? Go ahead. But I think you can do better.

[proud2BlibKansan]

68. So you are equating abortion clinic murderers with slave hiders?

[mondo joe]

75. No - they make the equation,, same why you do. You might have a problem

with reading comprehension, or you'd note that in every instance I explained that THEY use the argument - not me.

But if you have no problem with it, it's your choice.

[treestar]

134. You're missing a very big difference - the bomb

[lumberjack_jeff]

126. Undocumented workers HAVE harmed american workers.

Remember them?

[proud2BlibKansan]

151. No they have not

The EMPLOYERS who hire them are harming American workers. The federal govt who allows these employers to break the law and refuses to protect American workers is harming them.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

192. I'm interested by your choice of words.

You say "the Government who allows these employers to break the law" as though you think that that's in itself a fault of the Government.

If you do think that, do you also think that allowing illegal immigrants to break the law is something the Government shouldn't be doing? If not, what's the distinction you draw?

[NNN0LHI]

47. I have never heard the correlation between abortion bombers and...

...people who helped people escape slavery made before.

Perhaps you are the one who needs to check the "company" you keep?

Don

[mondo joe]

81. You must not read the news. Sorry!

:shrug:

[NNN0LHI]

97. Don't be sorry

Most condescending assholes I know aren't really sorry when they say they are anyway. See ya.

Don

[mondo joe]

107. Tch tch. I really am sorry that you didn't know you were using their

very same argument. I hope learning it does some good.

[BuyingThyme]

11. What you're saying doesn't make sense.

People who practice civil disobedience use the rule of law to get their points across.

What you're saying is that one particular group of people should be above the rule of law.

Pure silliness.

[proud2BlibKansan]

14. They break the law because they are desperate

just like Cindy is desperate to end this illegal war.

It makes perfect sense.

[BuyingThyme]

15. Nope. You're now using purely disingenuous fallacies, and you

clearly realize it.

The next time you look for American heroes to crap on, you should come up with a better line of thinking -- or any line of thinking.

[proud2BlibKansan]

30. I am not crapping on anyone

I am criticizing those of you who freak out because undocumented workers are 'ILLEGAL'.

[BuyingThyme]

36. But you disingenuously used Cindy Sheehan et al to do it.

[proud2BlibKansan]

50. I am not being the least bit disengenuous

If it feels uncomfortable, good. That was my point.

[BuyingThyme]

58. It's disingenuous to equivocate unrelated behavior in an effort

to liken unrelated causes.

You might as well say, since I drive a black car, I must hate white people.

Pure silliness.

[mondo joe]

20. Cindy accepted arrest - she didn't break the law and hide out.

Civil disobedience calls for accepting arrest.

[proud2BlibKansan]

32. But she is still ILLEGAL

[mondo joe]

53. She's still illegal WHAT?

An illegal immigrant is illegally in the US.

What is Cindy doing that's illegal right now?

[proud2BlibKansan]

65. There will be more arrests in August in Texas

They are also planning on standing down for Divine Strake in Nevada the first weekend of June. Isn't planning to break the law illegal? I think they call it conspiracy. OMG they could be doing that RIGHT NOW!!

[mondo joe]

71. If she's doing something illegal and her wherabout are known why

isn't she arrested?

[proud2BlibKansan]

88. I am not a cop so I can't answer that

But hey, if you are all about law and order, then turn her in.

[mondo joe]

90. Funny - you said she's illegal. Now you plead ignorance.

At least you're making progress.

[proud2BlibKansan]

99. You asked me why she wasn't being arrested

I answered that I don't know since I am not a cop.

Try READING for a change.

[mondo joe]

106. LOL!!! Okay - that explains your odd notions of what's illegal.

[treestar]

137. illegal aliens would have to accept arrest too, if ICE ever gets

around to arresting them.

[mondo joe]

164. Big difference between standing up in public to be arrested and hiding out

to avoid arrest and "having" to accept it IF it happens.

[Sterling]

166. desperate?

If I need food or money can I steal it from your house? Or if I am unemployed can I have your job?

[ulysses]

16. you're trying to legislate human nature

which only dictates that a person is going to do what is necessary to provide for himself and his family.

Want to end illegal immigration? Enforce labor standards both here and abroad and help folks find good work where they are. Nothing else is going to work.

[mondo joe]

18. All laws legislate human nature. -eom-

[ulysses]

21. not really.

Some do, but I wouldn't say that it's legislating human nature to, say, outlaw murder.

[mondo joe]

23. Yes, really. Sometimes it's human nature to want to hurt others.

Or to take posessions. Or even to kill. If it weren't human nature humans wouldn't do it.

[ulysses]

26. perhaps we take a different view of human nature.

:shrug:

[mondo joe]

28. If humans do it, it is by definition human nature.

You can disagree with the plain logic of that if you like, but the fact remains.

[ulysses]

31. ?

Cannibalism exists in some cultures. Human nature?

[mondo joe]

38. Yes, by definition. If humans do it, by definition it is human nature.

You can pretend otherwise and idealize the species all you like, but the fact remains that if humans do it it is human nature. If not, humans wouldn't do it.

[ulysses]

41. we'll use your definition then.

How's it working out for us?

[mondo joe]

I don't share your need to candy coat the truth.

Human nature includes a lot of things.

Laws exist to regulate human nature. Simple matter of fact.

[ulysses]

62. I'm not candy coating anything.

And the question still stands. How's this all working out for us? Laws against immigration have been on the books for lifetimes - haven't stopped it. Laws against drug use have been on the books for years - haven't stopped it. Lots of folks dead or in jail, though.

[mondo joe]

70. How is immigration law working for us? Poorly. Not because the law is

wrong, but because it serves too many too well to not enforce it.

[ulysses]

76. fair point, but I'd go farther.

Considering our borders, coastline and relative affluence, it's unenforceable. Solve the problem in a different way.

[mondo joe]

78. I don't need a different way - I do need a government that actually

WANTS to enforce the law. The borders are the least of the problem.

[ulysses]

86. even with that government

immigrants will come to America, legally or illegally, in search of better wages. Bank on that.

[mondo joe]

96. With a government that cared to enforce the law there would be a response.

Right now it profits too many.

American employers benefit, and as a result paid politicians benefit too. The Mexican government benefits.

Real enforcement would mean penalties for employers and for Mexico.

[treestar]

140. What is wrong with American employers benefitting, exactly?

Is there something wrong with being an employer? If you want so badly to be an employee, why do you dislike employers so? Have you ever considered starting your own business. No. That would be unamerican, I guess.

The immigration laws could easily be changed to let AMERICANS hire whoever they want to hire to the benefit of the company, making it more likely the company will grow and have yet more jobs (some of them too skilled for the average Mexican) to fill.

But some people would rather be poor and pristine. (as if the US was EVER pristine).

[Irreverend IX]

145. Is that the sound of trickle-down economics I hear?

Do you think it's acceptable for employers to benefit from virtual slave labor? The reason undocumented workers are more profitable is that you can pay them less than minimum wage, ignore workplace safety guidelines and fire them if they get sick or hurt with impunity. In industries like meat-packing, lawn care, and roofing undocumented workers have forced thousands of US citizens out of jobs that once paid union wages with benefits. The rise in profits brought about by hiring illegal immigrants might lead to the creation of a couple hundred office jockey positions, but it wouldn't come close to compensating for the jobs lost to undocumented workers. Also, the jobs created would mostly be middle management, not something a working-class person could get into.

[mondo joe]

148. The only thing wrong about it in this case is that they are one of th

groups benefiting from ILLEGAL hires that is a disincentive to enforce the law.

You have mistaken my post and/or myself for having some different meaning.

[Sterling]

173. If your company needs illegals to stay in biz just quit now

You are the largest part of the problem here. You are willing to cut the throat of your fellow Americans for the sake of profit. You are also willing to take advantage of people who are desperate and willing to work for next to nothing. Anyone who thinks it's fine to do this is a selfish prick and should go to jail and be driven out of business.

[treestar]

139. Tell them to enforce it, it's your government

It's already the law. The penalty for an alien being in the US without a valid nonimmigrant status or immigrant status is removal (deportation). Same alien is inadmissible for the next ten years.

Many aliens, now, have a case for a valid status. It takes the USCIS at least a year to open an envelope. Are you as rabid for THAT part to be "enforced?" If they should deport the illegals NOW, shouldn't they grant the petitions for residence for those who qualify for it UNDER the LAW, NOW?

[BuyingThyme]

19. I didn't know I was legislating anything.

[ulysses]

22. you're not. I said you're trying.

People have always crossed borders in search of a better life, and they're not going to stop now just because it's an election year.

[mondo joe]

24. People have always stolen things too.

People have always done a lot of things that are against the law.

[ulysses]

29. indeed they have.

A question, though - why is illegal immigration this huge issue now? It didn't just start.

[mondo joe]

33. Because illegal immigration legislation was brought up, of course.

That's why many things come up.

[ulysses]

37. who brought it up?

Think, now.

[mondo joe]

40. I don't need to "think" about it - I know * brought it up.

If you know who brought it up don't ask stupid questions like why is it being discussed now.

[ulysses]

44. so...you enjoy playing the games the GOP tells you to play?

Or is that a stupid question?

[mondo joe]

51. I didn't start the thread, and I responded AFTER you. If you want to bitch

about people talking about this issue bitch at yourself or the person who started the thread.

[ulysses]

54. neither proud nor I began the ongoing DU discussion

on this issue. And I try not to bitch at myself too often - people tend to stare.

[mondo joe]

61. LOL - what a joke. You whine at me because I'm addressing the topic

you and Proud already had going, then you fail to take responsibility for the very thing you whine about - talking about immigration.

:rofl:

[ulysses]

66. oh, I'm not whining, friend.

:) And I'm perfectly happy to state that, yes, I'm talking about immigration. I'm doing so because the issue seems to have gotten some traction and isn't going away.

[mondo joe]

77. ROFL! So first you say by talking about immigration I'm doing

the bidding of th he GOP - just by TALKING ABOUT IT AT ALL - so by your own standard you're doing the bidding of the GOP. And willingly too.

Congratulations.

[ulysses]

83. perhaps I've been unclear.

just by TALKING ABOUT IT AT ALL

No. My point is that we're letting ourselves get pinned between Bush and the Minutemen, which is not where we should be. Yes, I'm annoyed that the issue is still getting time on DU, but it's been carrying on just fine without much of my input for several weeks now, so let's talk. But if we're going to talk, can we talk about genuine solutions that might actually have a shot at working?

[mondo joe]

89. You've definitely been unclear. Just review your posts in this sub thread

First you can't defend one position, so you ask why are we talking about this - I tell you who and you say by talking about it I'm doing the bidding of the GOP. Even though YOU were talking about it too, and before me at that.

I swear, if there is one thing I could do for American schools it would be to require logic be taught.

Now we can talk about solutions if you like - that would be a good thing. But kicking it off with fallacies isn't going to help.

[ulysses]

93. what haven't I defended?

:shrug:

[mondo joe]

98. Oh, you defended several fallacies - just not well, so you had to stop

and take up a different fallacy instead.

[ulysses]

101. examples, please.

I don't recall having had to abandon anything. Where do you mean?

[mondo joe]

105. Human nature fallacy; GOP games fallacy.

[ulysses]

111. no fallacies - we disagree on human nature.

I don't regard cannibalism as human nature. And the only reason we're discussing the issue right now is because the GOP desperately needs us to focus on something other than their own fuckups - however, if you have a speck of dust in your eye and it won't go away, you'll have to address the problem in order to see clearly again.

Now, give me some other "fallacies" I've defended and I'll torture a few more analogies. :D

[BuyingThyme]

27. You seem to be fabricating the parameters of this debate,

which is fine, but I don't know how I got into the mix. I haven't said anything about any legislation or borders or a better life or an election year.

[lumberjack_jeff]

127. Who knew?

Who knew it'd be so easy. You mean all we have to do is enforce our labor standards in Mexico. Gee, thanks.

:sarcasm:

[mondo joe]

17. You are incorrect. If you are in the US illegally, you are an illegal

all the time you are here.

If Cindy did something illegal and a legal process is completed, she's not "illegal".

Furthermore, Cindy accepted arrest, in the civil disobedience tradition of Gandhi, MLK and Rosa Parks. Illegal aliens are not doing that.

[proud2BlibKansan]

42. So a convicted felon is not illegal?

That's news to me.

[ulysses]

46. what I want to know

is who Ann Illegal is.

[proud2BlibKansan]

82. Let's Google her!

[mondo joe]

49. It's not the terminology I'd use. I'd say "a felon".

"An illegal" is commonly understood to refer to "an illegal immigrant" or "an illegal alien".

If you want to say Cindy is an illegal, I'd ask an illegal what?

[proud2BlibKansan]

57. She is an illegal ditch sitter (in Texas)

and an illegal sidewalk sitter (in NY) and an illegal sitter in front of the WH. Oh and there was that t-shirt too. So I guess we can call her an illegal dresser as well.

[mondo joe]

67. I'm not familiar with sitting being illegal.

When people start referring to illegal sitters as illegals you might have a point. But not now.

[proud2BlibKansan]

94. Sitting in a ditch is illegal in Crawford, Texas

And apparently it is also illegal to sit in front of the UN and the WH. And wearing a t-shirt to the SOTU is also illegal.

[mondo joe]

102. Then you just keep proving you don't know what you're talking about.

The shirt incident was resolved - nothing illegal there.

And there's nothing illegal about sitting in a ditch either, to my knowledge.

[proud2BlibKansan]

108. Oh yes indeed it is illegal to sit or stand in a ditch in Crawford, Texas

This law was passed in September, after Cindy's month long stand outside the bush ranch.

[mondo joe]

110. ROFL - cite the law please.

[proud2BlibKansan]

116. No you look it up

I am sitting her amazed that you don't believe me. Why do you think the sheriff in McClennan (sp?) County Texas arrested 20 people who sat in ditches in November and again in April?

There were only a couple hundred threads right here about these incidents. LOL

Look what the first thing to come up on my Google search was!! But I guess you think this poster is making this up. LOL
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5440145

[mondo joe]

135. So you state it as fact but I have to look it up? A law that people can't

sit in a ditch?

I don't blame you for not wanting to back that up.

[proud2BlibKansan]

149. Links are in my OP and in my previous response

You are just being difficult on purpose at this point.

[mondo joe]

165. No, you simply won't support your own claims and want others to do the

research for you.

[proud2BlibKansan]

175. And you are being obtuse

It is against the law to occupy a ditch in McClennon County, Texas. There are 20 people who have been arrested there for violating this law. The link is in my OP. I HAVE done the research.

[mondo joe]

199. I'm mortified that a teacher can't tell civil disobedience from plain old

illegal activity.

And it's not illegal to - as you've said - STAND in a ditch. Thanks for trying to be a little more accurate.

By the way, where in Cindy right now?

[uppityperson]

191. Here are some links, more @ articles @ each link.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E00E5D91330F933A0575AC0A9639C8B63&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fPeople%2fB%2fBush%2c%20George%20W%2e

Prompted by Cindy Sheehan's makeshift antiwar campsite, McLennan County commissioners have enacted a law prohibiting camping along county roads, including those near President Bush's ranch. The law follows Ms. Sheehan's nearly monthlong protest in August outside Mr. Bush's ranch near Crawford. Commissioners approved the new ordinance Tuesday by a 3-to-2 vote. They voted two weeks ago to prohibit parking along 23 miles of county roads.

http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/05/11/ale05159.html

After we left Crawford at the end of August, McLennan County designated the county bar ditches “no speech zones by making it illegal to camp, eat or erect a structure for living in them . Additionally, they created a no parking zone for a 7 mile radius around the Bush ranch. This is a violation of our constitutional rights to free speech and free assembly. On Tuesday, November 22, some of us will challenge this ordinance by gathering in the Camp Casey 1 ditch to let George Bush know that he cannot continue to turn a deaf ear to our grievances.

http://www.texascivilrightsproject.org/newspub/clip_051116_cindy_returns.html

McLennan County commissioners passed two ordinances in response to Sheehan's demonstration earlier this year when thousands of protesters converged on the sleepy Texas town of 700 people. Residents complained of noise and traffic congestion prompting commissioners to act, said Stephen Hendrick, a spokesman for the McLennan County Commissioners Court.

One ordinance bans parking along all 14 roads within a five-mile radius around the ranch. The other prohibits camping or placing portable toilets in any county ditch.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12321741

Commissioners enacted the ordinance — and another banning some roadside parking — a month later after neighbors complained of traffic congestion from the monthlong rally that drew thousands to the 700-resident town.

Do a quick search for Mclenna ditch illegal ordinance, or some such. I think you just like to argue.

[mondo joe]

198. And in none of these is it illegal to stand in a ditch.

I don't like to argue - but I do like honesty and accuracy.

[uppityperson]

200. Can sit or stand, so long as you don't park, eat or camp

Either walk or get dropped off, then don't eat and don't camp or sleep there and you are fine. I wonder if they allow drinking of water since it is a long ways to walk without drinking. Depends on what your definition of "sit" is. If you mean plant your butt for a bit, during the day, without eating, without parking, it is fine to sit in the ditch. If you mean plant your butt for a good long sit, say overnight, that is illegal.

[mondo joe]

201. "Sit" can mean stay overnight camping now?

What a funny dictionary you must use.

[uppityperson]

202. "I sat in the ditch overnight" means I camped, according to the county

what a funny dictionary they use.

"I sat in the ditch for the day" means I am really hungry because I could eat only illegally.

[FlaGranny]

153. She's only illegal while she is doing those things,

not after she has been arrested and paid her fine or done her time. Then she is no longer illegal.

[Renew Deal]

56. What does it mean to be illegal?

The term illegals in the context of immigration is descriptive and has no legal definition.

[cornermouse]

60. No. A convicted felon has engaged in illegal acts.

By definition, a convicted felon is not illegal, his actions are illegal. He does, however, spend time in prison for his illegal actions. Is that (prison) what you are advocating as the destination of choice for the illegal immigrants?

[Igel]

142. No, a convicted felon is not illegal.

You can't describe really people, just actions, acts, and states, with the adjective. "Illegal alien" is a counterexample, but such examples are rare; in this case, I suspect it's because the word 'alien' derives from an adjective (adjectives express states), and we were stuck with the lexicalized expression when sci-fi writers convinced a generation of semi-literate Americans that 'alien' means 'somebody from outer space.' Adjectives + nouns frequently have the adjective modifying the action the noun expresses; the construction is ambiguous.

Paraphrase the expressions using 'illegal'; you'll see what I mean. An illegal immigrant, for the 15th or 20th time, isn't an illegal person who immigrates; that would imply they were illegal in Mexico or Russia--instead an illegal immigrant is a person who illegally immigrates. It works for eventives, too: a quick run isn't a quick instance of running, but an instance of quick running.

Same for things like 'unauthorized resident' or an 'sloppy eater': it's not an authorized person who resides in a place, or a sloppy person that eats. Without the willingness to actually make an effort to resolve ambiguity, there's little chance for communication. Some people like spite and taking truthy nifty slogans as truth.

[0007]

100. I'll second that. It is a silly analogy by the OP

[Renew Deal]

52. This doesn't make sense.

One has nothing to do with another. Entering this country illegally is not civil disobedience by definition. It is not a resistance to the government.

[TahitiNut]

55. Oh for Christ's sake!

These rants are really getting tiresome. I'll tell you what - just go ahead and "assume" whatever y'all want. At the same time, don't even bother to participate in discussions. After all, if someone states the reasons for their opinions, why even believe them? Who the fuck cares, right?

It reminds me of the OJ trial. We all know thant anyone who believes OJ was guilty is just a fucking racist, right??? Who cares what they say? Strangely enough, I happen to accept the jury's verdict of reasonable doubt - a TON of it. But I NEVER accused anyone with the opposite opinion of being a racist ... not even off to the side and accusing them as a group!

Sheesh, p2bl, you're far, far more capable of reasonable posts than this, at least in my opinion from having read your contributions. Just what good does it do to preemptively attack other DUers by ascribing such attitudes to those with whom you have a difference of opinion? Does it REALLY serve the interests of civil discussion?

:puke:

[proud2BlibKansan]

80. Name calling is not the way to solve the immigration dilemna

The workers are NOT the enemy. The employers are. That point has been made hundreds of times here and yet again, today, I see posts calling the undocumented workers 'illegals'. And it occurred to me that anyone who breaks any law is engaging in an illegal activity. So if you oppose 'illegal' immigrants, then I assume you also oppose Cindy Sheehan and Daniel Ellsberg and Diane Wilson.

I am just sick and tired of the ignorant comments on this issue.

[mondo joe]

84. Nor are fallacious analogies.

try this: If you don't oppose illegal immigrants, you must not oppose illegal rapists.

[Zookeeper]

144. I agree, TahitiNut....

it's to the point where some posters are throwing temper tantrums when someone disagrees with them. Being "tiresome" is the least of it; my concern is how determined they are to be DU's Thought Police.

[meisje]

59. Rape is illegal

[BuyingThyme]

63. If you don't support rape, Cindy Sheehan is an illegal alien.

There. I said it.

[Igel]

143. You replied to the wrong post.

But the poster you tried to reply to has a valid point.

People who believe that 'illegal immigrant' means 'an illegal person who immigrates'--it's the person that's taken to be illegal, as the OP tried to make English mean. Therefore 'illegal rapist' (which sounds strange to my ears) would be 'an illegal person that rapes'. But that implies that "illegal immigrant" should sound as strange as 'illegal rapist', and it doesn't for people that haven't been taught that it must sound strange. You can teach people that anything sounds strange; that doesn't mean much.

The reason 'illegal rapist' sounds strange is that it implies a contrast with 'legal rapist': an illegal rapist is a person who rapes illegally (there's the redundancy: rape is, by definition, illegal), and a legal rapist is the implied oxymoron. ("Legal occupant" versus "illegal occupant" shows the appropriate and semantically completely felicitous contrast, as does 'legal immigrant' and 'illegal immigrant'.)

[Fountain79]

69. I'm sympathetic to their situation...

but this is a stretch in logic.

[WhiteTara]

73. these are two different issues

Cindy Sheehan is not "illegal". If anything, she could be considered "a public nuisance" as these were acts of civil disobediance. Illegal immigrants are something else. These are people who did not enter the country legally. They are not protesting by coming into the country.

Sorry, I have empathy for the undocumented, but your logic is flawed.

[proud2BlibKansan]

104. They are willingly breaking the law

as is Cindy.

[mondo joe]

109. No, not ""as is Cindy". Cindy is willing to stand and be accountable.

That's the tradition of civil disobedience.

Hiding out from the law is not civil disobedience.

[proud2BlibKansan]

120. The undocumented workers are not hiding

They do show up at work. It's easy to find them.

[mondo joe]

131. Not hiding? That is thhe biggest BS statement in a BS thread.

They are certainly not public in breaking the law.

I'm sorry you have rationalized this in such a way that you can't even be honest.

[Bobbie47]

74. You are with us or against us

where have I heard that at.

Oh yeah, bush.

[mondo joe]

79. When illegals make themselves known to break the law as Cindy has I'll

say they're engaged in civil disobedience too.

But they're not. They're hiding.

[Freedom_Aflaim]

91. Funny, you left off the immigrant part

That pretty much breaks down the entire argument.

Cindy is neither a criminal immigrant, nor a legal immigrant. Shes not even an immigrant.

btw, the "undocumented workes" in this country are rarely undocumented. They are usually "forged-documented workers". Which usually means that someone is a victim of their identity theft.

[proud2BlibKansan]

112. Nice RW talking point there

I suppose you also think they are receiving welfare, food stamps and Medicaid.

[cornermouse]

115. You disappoint me tonight.

This behavior is unnecessary. I had a better opinion of you than this.

[proud2BlibKansan]

119. I am just sick and tired of the dishonesty and name calling

90% of the kids in my school are Hispanic. Many of them are not US citizens. They are all poor. Many don't have ANY health care. ALL of them are HUMAN BEINGS. I happen to believe that human beings are not illegal. If that disappoints you, then so be it.

[mondo joe]

138. If you're tired of dishonesty don't pretend illegal aliens are engaging in

civil disobedience.

[proud2BlibKansan]

150. I am not pretending

[mondo joe]

161. You certainly are. Illegal immigrants are NOT engaging in civil

disobedience.

[proud2BlibKansan]

174. They are breaking the law, are they not?

And so is Cindy.

[mondo joe]

196. Simply breaking the law is not civil disobedience, and Cindy IS NOT

breaking the law anyway.

[cornermouse]

158. You indirectly accused the person above me of being a republican

Some might think that name calling. I thought you were above that.

And by the way a lot of Americans are poor and don't have ANY health care and the last I looked we were all considered human beings.

The fact is the other posters are right. You didn't set this one up well at all. Or else you were just out looking for a fight. I think those of us on this particular board have no problem with legal immigration. The problem with those who object is the illegal immigration and its unfortunate you refuse to recognize that fact.

[proud2BlibKansan]

163. No I didn't; I accused them of spouting a RW talking point

And that seems to be far too common from Dems these days.

Yes, we are ALL human beings. Even the undocumented workers and their children.

The reason Americans don't have health care is the selfish laws passed by repukelicans - especially in MO. That problem is not the fault of immigrants, legal or not.

The reason jobs are being given to undocumented workers instead of American citizens is because companies are hiring them to work for less than American citizens. The companies are the enemy here, not the workers. Corporations are taking buses across the border and smuggling workers here. Yet we blame the workers?? Why not law and order discussions about why corporations are not being held accountable? Is it just easier to blame the brown skinned people? Republicans defend big business; Democrats stand up for PEOPLE.

I don't know how many times I have posted this factoid but here I go again: It is nearly impossible to immigrate LEGALLY from any Central American country. Reagan (another repukelican) changed the immigration laws. These people are hungry and desperate. They see a better life north of the border and they are willing to do ANYTHING to take care of their families, even break the law by crossing the border illegally. Just like Cindy Sheehan is willing to break the law to end this unjust war. Yet here on DU, we have probably 100% support for Cindy, while not even a majority for undocumented workers. That makes me angry.

I'm sorry you don't understand that. I am thinking like a Democrat instead of a selfish repukelican.

[Freedom_Aflaim]

117. I dont know if criminal immigrants are on medicaid, food stamps, welfare

Since you brought it up, feel free to talk about it. (I doubt it, since that would only draw attention to their criminal status)



I do know that criminal immigrants forge ssn cards using other folks ssn numbers. This is a common tactic so get around their "undocumented" status and represents another victim of their crimes.


Finally, you may have noticed that folks opposed to criminal immigration are on both sides of the isle, so your "RW talking points" is just a hollow attack without substance.

[proud2BlibKansan]

154. This is a human rights issue

and if Democrats could come together and embrace it that way, we will win the debate. It's a win win for us. But we MUST place the blame where it belongs, which is, IMO, not with the undocumented workers.

[mondo joe]

167. There is no "human right" to cross national borders without permission.

[proud2BlibKansan]

172. But it is a human right to eat and have shelter

[mondo joe]

197. Do Mexicans who didn't cross have food and shelter?

[jbnow]

92. But she is not undocumented

These are word games. No one is an illegal person. Whatever side of the immigration without documentation you take people some people's immigration status is illegal.

We could use the term "people here without legal immigration status." We could say "people whose immigration was illegal". We could say illegal immigrants.

No one says or means illegal people and the last damn thing we need in looking at this question is words games.

[proud2BlibKansan]

114. "No one is an illegal person"

There are a ton of DUers who don't agree with that.

[mondo joe]

136. But there are persons whose very presence is illegal every moment of

their lives because they have crossed a national border without consent.

[mondo joe]

113. Eric Rudolph is an illegal. He has broken the law.

Eric Robert Rudolph, also known as the Olympic Park Bomber (born September 19, 1966) is an American terrorist who committed a series of bombings across the southern United States, murdering three people and injuring at least 150 others. Rudolph declared that his bombings were part of a guerrilla campaign against abortion, "the homosexual agenda" and perceived support for them from the United States government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Robert_Rudolph

[evlbstrd]

118. May I just add this these thoughts?

Proud, I respect and admire what you do, and I'm proud to call you a friend.
Thoreau, Ghandi, King, Sheehan, et al, practiced civil disobedience. The practice is very well defined.
But, I would also say that illegal immigration and protests against current policy and enforcement are different arguments. The economic disparities that exist between the Northern and Southern hemispheres around the world are the criminal result of global corporatism. Civil disobedience against this is warranted. That's what the marchers did. It was a boycott.
The argument that strays is the enforcement argument, that these illegal immigrants have no right to protest their conditions.
People don't cross borders illegally in protest. They do it in desperation. The big problem here is the rights of workers everywhere. Working people everywhere should join in the call for fair wages and working conditions. To stop these "free trade" agreements that favor business and bureaucracy over labor. And repeal the laws that gave corporations more rights than actual people.

[proud2BlibKansan]

124. I agree

But first we need to stop demonizing the undocumented workers.

[evlbstrd]

141. I thought that was central to my point.

True, I didn't actually say it. It's implied with workers' rights.

[Greyhound]

122. Blah, blah, blah.

What a waste of bandwidth. :eyes:

[proud2BlibKansan]

125. Then why reply?

LOL

[Greyhound]

156. Just to bring attention to the disingenuous nature of your propagandizing.

You have an agenda, I get it already. :eyes:

[proud2BlibKansan]

157. If respecting fellow human beings as human beings is an "agenda"

then so be it.

[Greyhound]

176. The issue has nothing to do with respecting other people,

(you don't seem to think respect works both ways) it is about our national sovereignty. You appear to be in favor of letting another nation just bleed us to death, with no consequences.

[proud2BlibKansan]

177. Name calling is not respecting

and no other nation is bleeding us to death (well, maybe Iraq).

We gain far more, economically and culturally, from Hispanic immigrants than they cost us. They are NOT bleeding us to death. :eyes:

[Greyhound]

179. Name calling? False accusations and then trying to change the issue?

It is not about Hispanic immigrants, it is about illegal immigrants. As for bleeding us to death, between suppressing wages, loss of tax revenues, declining standard of living, and the billions of $ shipped directly out of the country, we are hemorrhaging our national treasure at an alarming rate. Of course illegal immigration is not the sole cause of many of these issues, but it certainly exacerbates them.

I am utterly mystified as to where where you got the name calling thing, I haven't called anybody anything.

[proud2BlibKansan]

180. Calling them illegals and aliens is name calling

Many DUers have used those terms.

I guess you don't understand why they are here illegally. I sympathize with them and don't think I would do any differently myself if I had no way to feed my family without breaking the law.

Wages are suppressed because employers are allowed to suppress them. Tax revenues are lost because employers break the law and hire undocumented workers and don't withhold taxes. The standard of living has been declining because of the bush economy, and the reagan one before that. Clinton didn't help with NAFTA.

It is just easier I guess to blame the undocumented workers than to place the blame where it truly belongs.

[Greyhound]

186. I also understand why they are here, and do not support either Party's

proposed clusterfucks.

I agree the solution is to make the employers accountable and I advocate stiff fines the first time, executive jail-time and more fines the second time, and forfeiture and liquidation of all assets for the third offense.

I too sympathize with their plight, but we won the geographic lottery, they did not. There are 7 billion people on this rock and @ least 5 billion of them have lives that suck, we cannot fix that, and to try will only result in our joining them.

I am curious why you chose to ignore the following, "Of course illegal immigration is not the sole cause of many of these issues, but it certainly exacerbates them.", but suspect it was intentional.

As for the term illegal aliens, that is accurate. If you chose to take offense then it is your problem, please own it and stop trying to put it on others.

[proud2BlibKansan]

187. That term is offensive to them; I am not just throwing that out

My students want to know why we call them 'aliens'. They are also offended by 'illegal'. They are kids and have done nothing but come here with their parents. How can we call them illegal? I wonder how many of these law and order types here think of the kids and what will happen to them. What if they were your kids?

I am not ignoring the statement about illegal immigration. I don't know where you came up with that. My point is that it is simplistic and dishonest to blame the immigrants for the problems. They are in a difficult situation, created by bad policies. Yet we demonize THEM? Democrats defend PEOPLE, at least the Democrats I know.

[Greyhound]

207. "Of course illegal immigration is not the sole cause of many of these

issues, but it certainly exacerbates them." I am not blaming them for causing the problems, only for making them worse.

As for the term illegal aliens, I will not be made responsible for others illiteracy, learn the meaning of the words. When one chooses to take offense, they surrender their power to others.

[lumberjack_jeff]

129. It strains the definition of "silly" to describe illegal workers this way

Those who legitimately engage in civil disobedience (like Rosa Parks and Cindy Sheehan) are working to improve their society.

At best, illegal immigrants are working to improve their society by wire transferring proceeds of employment that used to circulate in someone else's.

[Gabi Hayes]

146. Matt Taibbi on Cindy in Crawford

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/7581585/bush_vs_the_mother/

inside the Yellow Rose, a Bushbot fantasy store:

"Excuse me," I said, holding up two Old Glory mesh hats. "Which of these do you think looks more American?"

She smiled and walked away. A friendly feeling welled up inside me. Within five minutes I was talking to store owner Bill Johnson, a fanatical Bush devotee with a striking resemblance to frozen-sausage king Jimmy Dean. I introduced myself as a Fox TV booker named Larry Weinblatt and told Bill I wanted to bring Sean Hannity down to do a whole show with Sean standing between the Ten Commandments tablets. Bill was all over the idea.

"We want to have that kind of godlike effect," I said.

"Right," Bill said, nodding.

"Secondly, Sean, when he travels," I said, "he brings his own Nautilus equipment. He pumps iron before he goes on."

"Does he really?"

"Yeah," I said. "We get a lot of demonstrators when Sean does his show, and so what he likes to do, when he finishes the broadcast, he takes his shirt off and flexes his muscles for the crowd. You know, rrrr. . ."

"Is he really built like that?"

"Oh, man, he's huge," I said.

[proud2BlibKansan]

152. That's a great article - thanks for posting!

[Irreverend IX]

147. She may have broken the law...

But Cindy Sheehan is not in a continuous state of lawbreaking. Undocumented workers and their employers are. Some have also drawn parallels between immigration laws and drug laws, but it's comparing apples and oranges. When you say it's okay to violate a law, you're saying that there's no reason for that law to exist. If drug laws were thrown out there would be no damage to society, and the biggest change would probably be that drug addiction would rightly be viewed as a medical condition rather than as a crime. If immigration laws were all thrown out, we would have tens of millions of desperate people entering the country every year and our infrastructure and social programs would be overwhelmed.

[proud2BlibKansan]

155. I don't remember saying anything about throwing out immigration laws

But they are clearly not being enforced. So why blame the undocumented workers? My point is to point the finger of blame where it truly belongs - at employers who openly violate the laws and at our govt for not enforcing the laws.

[Kansas Wyatt]

168. Well how about this

Massive fines for employers employing illegal workers, with a three strikes law, and that employers business and assets are seized. All fines and seizure proceeds go to an Extended Unemployment Fund, which is an extension of existing unemployment funds, for citizens and legal immigrants. No employer is going to risk losing so much money and/or their business to the people they are screwing out of fair wages and adequate working conditions to begin with. Illegal workers would be forced to return home, since they would not be able to survive in the U.S., without any job for income. In other words, they would be forced to return home on their own, just like they came in illegally. Additional laws would not be added to the existing laws, but NO amnesty, citizenship, or any legal status would be granted either. It would only target those employing illegals, and all immigration laws remain the same, except with adequate enforcement.

Nothing is done to target illegals, and they have already made the choice to accept all of the existing terms when they entered illegally, continued to stay, and started a family. They knew they were here illegally to begin with, and nobody promised them any special status.

If you do not like that plan, how about this:
The U.S. imports foreign teachers to instruct all of the children from illegal immigrants. Now I'm sure several thousand teachers would have to be laid-off, due to the abundance of teachers and lack of actual legal immigrant and citizen students, but those laid-off teachers can just find employment in something else. After all, other working class citizens have had to do this already, and nobody cared about their situation. Would that plan work better, or would you go with the first plan?

Also, have you heard the status of the Olathe High School football coach who was hit by that reckless driver last month, and did they ever find the reckless driver who caused the accident?

[proud2BlibKansan]

170. I like your first idea

As for your second one, we have plenty of bilingual teachers; we don't need to import them.

Yes, they did find the driver who killed that coach. He was a teenager who drove recklessly. The fact that he was undocumented doesn't make his crime any worse. It's not like kids who are born here in America never drive recklessly and cause death and injuries.

edit: spelling - ouch!

[Kansas Wyatt]

178. I'm for the first plan to punish those who cause the problem

However, the second plan is exactly what is needed to get you to realize that working class citizens are and have been ruined by illegal workers. After all, you wouldn't want these illegal immigrant's children to have American propaganda drilled into their heads, when we could employ teachers from their own country to educate them. We could even pay the foreign teachers a lot less, to cut down the costs of educating illegal immigrant children. Hmm, why we could even let the less paid foreign teachers teach some citizens and legal immigrants, too. Don't worry, teachers can just give up on what they have done for a living, and find something else or go back to school for a new career. You don't hate foreign teachers teaching their citizens in our country do you?

Go to any housing construction sites, or even some commercial sites, and you will find many illegal workers, right in the KC Metro area. They are not there picking lettuce or fruit, and they have driven out construction workers (citizens & legal immigrants) who use to be able to support their families with their craft or trade, just like their fathers and grandfathers did. I guess it's only a problem if your livelihood is threatened, though.

What? The kid who violently caused that wreck was an illegal immigrant, and the coach died? Sure, I bet the coach's family feels the same way about illegal immigrants, as you.

[proud2BlibKansan]

182. So the coach died because the kid was here illegally?

Tell that to my friend whose brother was killed by a drunk driver who was born right here in Kansas City. Or to my co-worker who lost her son in a wreck caused by a speeder who ran a red light at a dangerous intersection, and who was also an American citizen. The accident that killed the coach was a horrible tragedy, but it wasn't simply the result of illegal immigration. The 16 year old kid who killed him had also dropped out of school; would it be fair to say that raising the mandatory attendance age to 18 would have prevented this accident?

The undocumented workers are not the ones who drove out the American workers. The EMPLOYERS are. There is a guy here in KC who pays laborers ONE DOLLAR AN HOUR. Do you hold his workers more responsible than the thieving contractor? And why is he allowed to get away with that?

[Kansas Wyatt]

185. What part of

'I'm for the first plan to punish those who are responsible' don't you understand?

Hey, I only wondered if the family of a guy killed by an illegal immigrant felt the same way about illegal immigration as you.

I also gave you a perfect solution to the illegal worker problem, that did nothing to target illegal immigrants, except for enforcing existing laws (illegals already accepted those terms). I have said nothing about punishing illegal immigrants, and I have only suggested punishing employers with massive fines and possible loss of their business and it's assets for employing illegal workers. NOTHING about punishing the illegal workers.

I am curious about why you avoid having foreign teachers educate the illegal immigrants' children, and using them to replace existing teachers who are doing it now, for less money. We can even save a lot of educational expense by letting these foreign teachers help out with American children, and get by with even less teachers. After all, those teachers can just find something else or go back to school for a new career. Is it just okay for other workers to face that, but not teachers, or do you dislike foreign teachers possibly educating their history and heritage?

[proud2BlibKansan]

188. When did I disagree with your plan?

I also have no way of knowing how the coach's family feels, since I don't know them. However, if they blame illegal immigration for his death, I would suspect they are not thinking clearly. As I said, that is just as disingenuous as blaming the compulsory attendance laws.

Your scenario about teachers is unrealistic and just flame bait. I am politely ignoring that ridiculous notion. I DO understand the situation faced by many workers in this country. My husband is a contractor so we know first hand how tough the job market is. He did have to find a new line of work when his job was outsourced. And we have advised our kids to be prepared to join more than one profession. That is an economic reality and has little to nothing to do with immigration. To blame the immigrants is ignorant. As I have said over and over, they, along with our American born workers, are the victims of that economic reality. And Democrats defend WORKING PEOPLE rather than blame them.

[Kansas Wyatt]

205. You disagree with it every time you refuse to admit

Your "undocumented immigrants/workers" broke our laws from the very beginning and have ever since. You see, they don't just break the law by illegally entering the country, they break it every day they continue to stay, use false or phony Social Security numbers for employment, and/or just work for cash. They know they are breaking our laws, yet they demand a seat at the table anyway. My plan did not target illegals specifically, nor did it grant them any legal status or immune them from existing immigration laws they have already broken. You know the remedy for the laws they have already broken, because they have already been specifically outlined. Somehow, I doubt you would like the solution that already exists. That is why my plans cuts them off from employment, since no employer is going to risk so much to employ illegals. Which forces illegals to go back home on their own, just like they came in illegally. They already accepted those terms, when they broke our laws.

You do not like the notion of importing foreign teachers to educate illegal immigrants' children, because it applies to your line of work. It's okay for other people to be affected negatively, but they had better not complain about the why and how. Well, it's okay for them to complain about why it is happening, but they had better shut up about how it is happening.

Since American workers are no different than illegal workers, should American workers go protest in the illegal's country to change their country? Shouldn't the illegal worker just protest in his own country to change it? Why do you feel the American worker is responsible for the economic situation in the illegal worker's country? When did the American worker ever agree that the illegal had the same rights as an American?

Oh, and Democrats keep wondering why so many working class voters keep voting against their economic best interests, especially when working class people see Democrats placing illegal workers ahead of them for a higher cause. What does that light bulb mean? Democrats had better start worrying about representing the working people, who can legally work here and don't have the option of illegally entering into another country for a better opportunity, rather than representing a group that cannot work here legally or vote.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

193. I think that penalising the employers

is only justifiable if they know the employee is illegal, or have been negligent in checking.

When two people take part in a transaction which one of them knows is illegal and the other does not, it's hard to justify only penalising the one who didn't know.

I get the impression that an awful lot of liberals who take the attitude that employers should be penalised and the illegal workers themselves should not be are motivated by the belief, conscious or subconscious, that all employers are rich and powerful and anyone rich or powerful is evil, and that all illegal immigrants are poor and being poor is itself virtuous. Obviously, I can't tell if that's true of you or not, but if it is I'd urge you to rethink all elements of it.

I think it's very hard to justify legitimising illegal immigrants to America when there are so many people trying so hard and failing to immigrate legally. If you believe that more immigration is a good thing, I think the logical step is to make legal immigration easier, not to tolerate illegal immigration.

[Kansas Wyatt]

195. What you have described is the present excuse being used to hire

Illegal workers. 'Gee, they showed me their documents, and they looked good to me.' is a bullshit excuse, and everyone knows it. How many employed citizens were required to fill out a job application for just minimum wage jobs? I've never been given a job, without filling out the paperwork, which asks specific information about my background. Nobody will be able to convince me that they do not have ample opportunity to verify the validity of information their applicants provide (birthplace, schools, home address, experience, references, etc. etc. etc.).
For Example:
Boss Man: Hey Charlie, this guy says he was born in the city you were from, he lists such and such grade school and high school, and says his family has lived there their whole lives.
Charlie: No, those schools don't exist, but his grade school is a trade school. What's his home address?
Boss Man: Such and such street.
Charlie: Such and such street is a factory that closed down a few years ago. Did you ask him about how he got an elementary education from a trade school.
Boss Man: He says, he no speak english.

Sure, the employers who hire illegal workers really don't have any common sense or just do not give a damn about breaking the law. They know, and they would find out quickly if it meant massive fines and a loss of their business.

As for the illegals themselves, nothing is offered to them. Employers will no longer risk being heavily fined and/or their business seized, with the proceeds going directly to those they are screwing out of fair wages and conditions. Illegals would have no choice but to return home at their expense, since they no longer have the ability to earn any money and can't afford to stay in the U.S. After all, they already agreed to this fate, when they entered the country illegally.

[El Fuego]

162. George w. bush is an illegal; he has broken the law.

Someone had to say it.

bush said he subverted the U.S. Constitution and our laws FOR OUR OWN GOOD.

So do we call it civil disobedience? :crazy:

Does this mean the impeachment is off? :(

[Dr. Jones]

181. Illegal immigration is NOT civil disobedience.

Cindy is a U.S. citizen; illegal immigrants are not. You're comparing apples to oranges. For you to make some kind of noble victims out of those who snuck into our country illegally is simply ludicrous.

[El Fuego]

184. Another reason

It's not civil disobedience if your actions are entirely self-serving. It's not civil disobedience if you are going to personnally profit from the illegal action.

Civil disobedience involves personal sacrifice, such someone allowing themselves to be handcuffed and hauled off to jail just to make a point to the world.

If you're breaking the law just for personal gain, it's not the same thing.

[incapsulated]

183. Civil Disobedience is not the same as just "breaking a law"

Civil Disobedience means allowing yourself to be arrested and charged while either a) staging an illegal protest or b) deliberately breaking a law you consider unjust.

Just breaking the law doesn't make you a civil rights activist. If that were the case every rapist and murderer would be a activist "like Cindy Sheehan".

[kestrel91316]

194. Illegal aliens are trespassing in this country. Cindy Sheehan is not.

She has the right to be in the US. They do not.

It's pretty basic.

[jerry611]

203. What the hell are you talking about???

There is a law that specifically states that if you are not a citizen of the United States, and you do not have permission to enter the country, and you do so anyway without permission, you are a criminal. Now this is a law that every single nation on this planet has. We are not some Nazi-like nation for creating that law. Every nation that has a border has that law. Otherwise why have borders?

It is also a violation of international law. The United Nations does not allow you, unless you have refugee status, to go into another nation without permission. You have no such right.

If you do cross the border without permission, you are an illegal alien. People call them "illegals" for short. And going by the law, they are criminals. And if the President doesn't arrest them and round them up, he is not following his constitutional duty to enforce the laws of our republic. And it was made very clear by the people who wrote the 14th Amendment that the constitution DOES NOT apply to foreign nationals. And the Supreme Court has backed that up several times.