Illegal immigrants being considered criminal? What a bizarre idea!

The least those democrat politicians paying attention could do is sign the illegals up fast as Cook County voters!

John:

Yes, it's hard to think of a stupider policy than criminalizing the most decent Americans.

When they're official....

Where was INS?

"importing family-oriented Christians who are eager to work would lower crime rates"

But if I read that convoluted article correctly, was it not saying that the longer these family-oriented Christians lived amongst us, they proceed to commit violent crimes against us. Oh dear, to know us is to hate us.

Also " major reason is that more than a quarter of all those of Mexican descent were born abroad and more than half lived in neighborhoods where the majority of residents were also Mexican". Okay, so your solution is to put them on reservations.

John, they're just Americans born in the wrong country.

h:

To have them homestead our cities.

h: Yes, the article is saying that after they've been here for a while, "they" become "us." It does seem like a dirty trick to play on them.

If "Open Doors Don't Invite Criminals", does Mr. Sampson leave his home unlocked? And are those prisons chock-full of Mexican criminals in California and elsewhere a figment of our imagination?

I agree that Mexicans and Latinos generally make good citizens. And I agree that we should have healthy levels of immigration. And I see our Christian duty to help people.

It does not follow that our borders should be erased and the concept of citizenship made meaningless. It seems to me there is some immanentizing of the eschaton going on. And the
America-bashing would make a Lefty proud.

I'm not baiting you, oj, but how does this differ from the Tran-nationalists?

Noel:

Yes, we should have closed borders and unlimited immigration of those who believe in our ideals.

oj;

You know how I despise sarcasm.

Seriously, we should have neither closed borders nor unlimited immigration. We shouldn't blind ourselves to the many benefits--nor the costs.

I have no objection to siphoning-off the most ambitious people from Latin America to build America. That's what we did in Europe. But when we have no screening process, we also get criminals drifting in and out, and we shouldn't pretend otherwise.

Immigration is what has made this country so great. It allowed us to grow from sea to sea. Our policy of granting citizenship upon birth and providing the most meritocratic civilization on earth has allowed disparate peoples from all over the world to call themselves Americans. That is why we are such a strong nation. So many of us are here by choice made by ourselves or by an ancestor and not just by chance.
Because of a relatively low birth replacement rate and perhaps too many aborted potential Americans, we could not and cannot grow and prosper without further immigration. That is why no political party is serious about doing anything to stem the tide of illegals. We need national policies that balance our need for population growth with our need for security.

"I have no objection to siphoning-off the most ambitious people from Latin America to build America. That's what we did in Europe. But when we have no screening process, we also get criminals drifting in and out, and we shouldn't pretend otherwise."
Noel has a point, the most ambitious and motivated people on earth are immigrants, and our immigration policies have changed quit a lot since the late 1940's. As an example, my father immigarated to the USA from post-war Germany with his wife and infant son in 1949. He and his wife were survivors of the Nazi death camps. Yet, before a visa to come the the USA was issued by the United States Department of State, the local German police authorities were queried as to whether my father had any criminal record. In addition, my father had to provide proof of a sponsor who would be financially responsible for him once he came to the States.
The policies for rational immigration probably lie somewhere betweem then and now.

In addition, my father had to provide proof of a sponsor who would be financially responsible for him once he came to the States.

Still true.

One of my brothers-in-law moved to America this year, and despite his having been married to an American for over a decade, the rest of us had to promise to be responsible for his support for the next decade.

Posted by: Michael Herdegen at March 11, 2006 2:52 PM

"Still true.
One of my brothers-in-law moved to America this year, and despite his having been married to an American for over a decade, the rest of us had to promise to be responsible for his support for the next decade."
This is exactly why illegal immigration has far outstripped the legal kind! Still too many regulatory hurdles and not enough physical barriers.

Noel:

What sarcasm? I think we should close our borders so that we can vet who's coming here and then let everyone who wants to be an American, as defined in our Founding texts, come. Unlimited immigration but regularized.

oj;

Sorry, I mis-read you. Then I would concur, providing it was done in assimilable fashion over time. I like my relatives, but I like them in doses.

Anybody? Why is this such a difficult concept to understand. Unlimited immigration from anywhere, but immigrants must agree to be documented, finger printed, DNA, eyeballs too if necessary. Swear that they want to be Americans and give them five years to learn the language, our system of government, etc. Criminal activities, out they go.

End of five years, citizenship or deportation.

Don't like that, stay home.

No more dual citizenship.

You make the commitment or you don't. No hedging your bets or tax ramifications.

The Freepers report that the crowd has as many if not more Mexican flags as American ones, but the CBS News website carefully cropped out all the Mexican flags from their photos.

Freepers are such reliable sources....

Sandy P. Right on about dual citizenship. The U.S. shouldn't allow it even for native born citizens. My son, who lives in France (don't ask) had to get French citizenship in order to work on some project (he's a physicist, again, don't ask) so he now has dual citizenship.

I don't like it and wish he would have had to decide just where his empty head wants to do be. Likewise for my granddaughter, who has dual citizenship as well. To his everlasting shame, she was born in la belle instead in the U.S. of A.