Shamnesty

Can I get a version of Bloglines that will automatically block posts featuring this word from my feedreader?

John Cole, in his inimitable fashion, puts it this way:

One last thing- the absolute best thing about this immigration debate being over is that with any luck I will never have to hear the word “shamnesty” again. Easily one of the most fucking-annoying-god-damn-too-cute-by-a-half-
‘I-am-going-to-repeat-it-every-fucking-chance-I-get-
because-I-think-it-makes-me-seem-clever-watch-me-
look-like-a-content-toddler-on-the-pot-when-I-say-it’
pet names … ever given to anything.

Related Posts

    No related posts

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. Techography on 28 Jun 2007 at 1:17 pm

    Points of Interest…

    Two Points of issue.

    The Armorer of Castle Argghhh! has an awesome fisk of this, as does John Shadegg, Congressman from Arizona.

    I have reprinted both of their stories here, and provided links to them.

    You NEED to read these, as they provide…

Comments

  1. Redhand wrote:

    D’oh, maybe you’re reading the wrong blogs * * * badda bing.

    As a fairly conservative immigration lawyer, I have mixed feelings about the Senate immigration bill. The American Immigration Lawyers Association, of which I’m a member, has major problems with the bill. Among other things it will gut an established family immigration statutory scheme that’s worked well for 40 years, and there is no assurance, at all, that the new “point system” will provide proper matches between willing employers and immigrant workers. That’s because the Government will rule on the points, rather than let the market bring employers and employees together.

    As for the “shamnesty” claim, that’s nonsense. The illegals will wait years and pay thousands to get green card status.

    What especially infuriates me are ideologues like Pat Buchanan who say that “shamnesty” means, and I quote, “automatic citizenship.” That’s a lie almost as big as anything Cheney says.

    If the bill passes one thing I will enjoy seeing is Michelle Malkin’s head explode.

    Posted 27 Jun 2007 at 10:47 pm

  2. BloodSpite wrote:

    Sure. IF it’s enforced. Like anything else has been enforced in the last decade regarding immigration.

    Personally I like to get a Bloglines with a direct feed of those site’s to me ;)

    Posted 28 Jun 2007 at 12:47 pm

  3. BloodSpite wrote:

    Just because I can’t let it go and I’m a sucker for this topic in any form.

    President Bush just today said “amnesty is when you pay a price for coming here illegally and this bill does that”.
    That’s right.
    Let me reword it the other way around just to be clear.
    President Bush says if you come here illegally and pay a price, that is the same as amnesty.

    Sort of like that whole “depends on what your definition of “is” is…” thing back in the late 90’s….heh.

    Posted 28 Jun 2007 at 1:16 pm

  4. Redhand wrote:

    Well, the bill went down in flames (again) and frankly I’m not that upset.

    The only thing positive in it was the legalization program for the 12 million and even that was riddled with uncertainty. The other, untested trade-offs were too great a price to pay in my opinion.

    Ultimately, legalization, amnesty, shamnesty, whatever you call it has to occur in some form because we can’t deport 12 million people. It’s logistically impossible, and socially undesirable when you consider how many of the illegals are married to Americans, have U.S. citizen children, etc. I see tragic and absurd combinations of illegals, half legals, and legal immigrants and non-immigrants every day in my practice. When citizens vital family interests are negatively affected, it’s appropriate there be some relief.

    A**holes like Tom Tancredo (Rep. CO) are blind to the human misery present in these situations; his “deport ‘em all” nonsense is an abomination.

    That said, the Right has a point about border enforcement. If we’re going to legalize most of the illegals who are here, that can’t serve as motivation for millions more to do an end run around the system.

    This area, above all others, is where Bush failed the most on immigration policy. For years he did nothing so that the Wal-Marts of this country could increase profit margins with cheap subcontractor labor. I even thought that Vincente Fox had to have pictures of Bush with a sheep or something, because his lax border enforcement was so incomprehensible.

    Now he’s reaping the harvest of his stupidity and fecklessness in this area, his supposed last best hope for staving off a leg-a-see of disafter. To hell with him I say. Let’s see what happens when the Dems dominate Congress, and capture the WH, in 2008.

    Posted 28 Jun 2007 at 7:13 pm

  5. Alon Levy wrote:

    that’s worked well for 40 years

    But it’s not working well - the US is facing shortages of professional workers, for example doctors.

    Posted 28 Jun 2007 at 7:15 pm

  6. BloodSpite wrote:

    Got some proof of that “worker shortage” Alon?

    Considering IBM, Dell and other companies are laying off hundreds of thousands of workers yearly, to say we have a “professional worker shortage” is to say the least, well…a bit foolish in my opinion.

    We have shortage of companies willing to pay wages for work.

    Hence why people are offering CNA’s a whopping $12 per hour. I can see huge amounts of people shivering in anticipation for that monumental salary rate for someone who spends 3 years of their life going to college to not even make $30 a year.

    As for deporting 12 million people a few points here: 1: By Law they should have been deported already. 2: They walked here. 3: We spend more money yearly, per family, per capita than they generate income to their local area.

    John Shadegg has a great article over at National Review regarding the entire scenario.

    But in the meantime I’ll point you to my own article series of “By the Numbers”. Here in Missouri, in a recent raid netted over 136 people in the country illegally.
    136 people arrested. As it stands 31 have been released for humanitarian reasons. However those 31 are still under investigation.
    But We’ll subtract them from the equation anyway to be fair.

    That leaves 105 People who were arrested.

    Of that 30 of them, all had prior convictions, and 17 of them have all been deported previously, or ordered to deport.

    That leaves 75 who are still under investigation by Supervisory Assistant US Attorney Michael S Oliver, and Assistant US Attorney’s Richard E Monroe and Gary Miligan. The investigations are being conducted by the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Social Security Administration, Office of the Inspector General, Office of Investigation, Missouri Highway Patrol, the US Marshals Service, Fugitive Task Force and the US Department of Agriculture.

    Hell 3 of them were deported as early January of this year.

    Now lets take it another step.
    A teenage rape victim in Adams County believed she would be safe after her attacker, an illegal immigrant, agreed to “voluntary” deportation from the United States.

    “A few weeks later, this girl is walking down the street and comes face to face with her rapist,” Rep. Amy Stephens, R-Monument, told the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday.

    Read that again. He raped a teenager, was deported, and then 3 weeks later was back in the country.

    I usually agree with you on a lot of things, Redhand, but I fear on this one I must part ways.

    The only “human misery” I see, is the fact that citizens rights are being ignored for people who broke the law in the first place to be here.

    So if we’re going to walk away from the law….and say all of those folks who broke the law are innocent of said law violation…at what point do we stop? And at what point does it become “Good enough for thee but not me”?

    I’d love to have some amnesty from my speeding tickets.

    Posted 28 Jun 2007 at 9:07 pm

  7. Redhand wrote:

    Read that again. He raped a teenager, was deported, and then 3 weeks later was back in the country.

    I usually agree with you on a lot of things, Redhand, but I fear on this one I must part ways.

    Bloodspite, such a person doesn’t get a “free pass,” i.e. just another deportation. Returning to the U.S. with an immigration “aggravated felony” like this on your record is a serious separate crime in and of itself under the Immigration and Nationality Act. It can land the perp. in federal prison for a maximum term of 20 years, a fact that the Pat Buchanans and Tom Tancredos of the world never mention. After the prison sentence, the perp never leaves federal custody; he’s placed on an immigration detainer and deported again.

    I know, I’ve seen it happen.

    In my view fact patterns like the rapist you mention represent a failure of the criminal justice system more than of the the immigration laws themselves. The enforcement tools are already there, with a vengeance.

    Also, be advised that the people arrested by ICE in the raids you mention were likely targeted because they had criminal records to begin with. Thus, you’re likely to see a highly skewed set of statistics tilted towards the criminal element in the numbers you cite. So, knowingly or not, your comments veer dangerously into the “all illegals are criminals” territory that is the favorite haunt of anti-immigrant demagogues, not that I’m suggesting you are (honest!)

    Michelle Malkin, however, is a pure POS on this subject.

    Posted 28 Jun 2007 at 10:20 pm

  8. Redhand wrote:

    But it’s not working well - the US is facing shortages of professional workers, for example doctors.

    This has nothing to do with the family immigration structure I’m referring to. It has everything to do with the ridiculously low non-immigrant working professional quota of visas (H1-B’s) Congress has set: 65,000/yr. This year the annual quota for H-1B jobs starting 10/01/2007 was exhausted 04/01/2007, the very first day applicants were eligible to apply! Just sayin.

    Posted 28 Jun 2007 at 10:27 pm

  9. BloodSpite wrote:

    such a person doesn’t get a “free pass,” i.e. just another deportation. Returning to the U.S. with an immigration “aggravated felony” like this on your record is a serious separate crime in and of itself under the Immigration and Nationality Act. It can land the perp. in federal prison for a maximum term of 20 years

    Actually, in my area, our arrest rate for previous deportee’s is over 70%.

    That is to say, 70% of the Hispanics (note I did not say Mexicans, we recieve El Salvador, Guatamalan, Columbian, and others) we arrest have been deported more than once.

    Also of the numbers I listed, they were not targeted previously. Suffice it to say based on the information provided you can ascertain I have some involvement with the LEO’s of the region.

    Not saying other places don’t do what your saying, however, in Arkansas Missouri I can tell you these facts.
    50% of the DUI cases in Springdale Arkansas in the last 12 months were Hispanic. Only 34% of the population of Springdale is Hispanic. Of the 50%, 68% were illegal. Of those 92% had previously been deported

    Hence why Springdale, bentonville, and Rogers, as well as Benton Counties are implementing the 287(g) program out of their own pockets.

    Of the 136 people i mentioned previously, 21 of them had been deported no less than 3 times furthermore 5 of them had prior felonies including possession of a firearm warrants, assault, rape and theft by taking.

    I’m not saying that ALL illegal immigrants are criminals. However a significant amount of them have little to no respect for the law.

    And why should they, given what little of it we have been allowed to enforce?

    Posted 28 Jun 2007 at 11:31 pm

  10. John the Marine wrote:

    So, knowingly or not, your comments veer dangerously into the “all illegals are criminals” territory that is the favorite haunt of anti-immigrant demagogues, not that I’m suggesting you are (honest!)

    Redhand, There are two aspects of this comment that to me illustrate the weakness of the Pro illegal immigration crowd.

    1. First all illegal immigrants are criminals by the very nature of their presence. By sneaking into the U.S. they have shown a complete disregard for our laws and the sovereignty of the United States. This is not a technicality but an obvious truth. I know, I know these poor down troden folks are just looking for work and are otherwise honest right? Well I need money for my car payment. So, I’ll just steel some from the bank. After all, other than steeling for my legitimate needs I’m an honest person.

    2. Since I hold the opinion that foreign nationals who violate my countries sovereignty and immigration laws should be punished I’m anti-immigrant right? Hog wash. Like most Americans I’m pro immigrant because like most Americans I’m a product of recent immigration. However, I think it is perhaps a good start for all who want to come here, whether on vacation or to immigrate, to obey our laws. Especially our laws governing who comes here, when they come and for how long. Also, I feel it is my government’s obligation to scrupulously enforce these laws with out regard for: race, national origin or sappy personal stories.

    Just as an aside. Stop whining about the human misery of these law breakers. They wouldn’t find themselves in their current situation if they had played by the rules.

    Finally it doesn’t matter what the Dems or GOP do in Congress or who holds the WH. If the U.S. doesn’t enforce its current laws what makes anyone think it will enforce new ones. So, there is already amnesty and there always will be because the U.S. Gov. is too much of a weak stick to enforce and protect its borders.

    Posted 29 Jun 2007 at 7:27 am

  11. commissar wrote:

    By the plain English meaning of the words, all illegals are criminals. Of course, so are speeders.

    Whether it’s immigration law, traffic law, or tax law, I’d prefer that we have laws that people actually obey, that can be enforced, and whose violation would generally considered to be a crime.

    Posted 29 Jun 2007 at 8:51 am

  12. BloodSpite wrote:

    Whether it’s immigration law, traffic law, or tax law, I’d prefer that we have laws that people actually obey, that can be enforced, and whose violation would generally considered to be a crime

    Took the words right out of my mouth ;)

    What I’d really like to see?
    A Complete overhaul of our Immigration admittance system. The fundamental system hasn’t been overhauled since roughly 1972. Increase the amount we allow in via the legal means of citizenship. Streamline the investigation system, meld Homeland Security, NCIS, FBI and INS in to a single point of data entry type system for those coming in. (The so-called “Matrix” database proposed in the late 1990’s).

    The H1B argument is moot, because in February of this year H1B applicant employers no longer have to prove there is an American available to do the job before applying for H1B. Which has already led to a rash of unemployment in the Telecom industry and displacement by Filipino’s.

    My other proposition is allow any current illegal alien entry as a citizen provided they enlist in a 4 by 2 year enlistment in the US Military. 4 years active, 2 years Reserve. At the end of the 4 years active, with a honorable discharge they will receive a work visa for a period of 2 years. At the end of the 2 years if fully discharged with no felony status crimes (I will forgive speeders ;) ) they receive an American citizenship.

    They wouldn’t pay a dime, because they have enlisted, essentially like the old “Military or Jail” system we had in the 1970’s. Difference being they will earn a salary, receive medical care, and furthermore will receive training as well as a mandatory basic English curriculum.

    BloodSpite for President, Dammit.

    Posted 29 Jun 2007 at 11:17 am

  13. Alon Levy wrote:

    The military isn’t the only way of proving one is a productive citizen. I’d argue that anyone who marched with Martin Luther King in the 1950s and early 60s should have received citizenship, if he wasn’t already a US citizen (even though many of those marches were illegal…). Even working hard and adhering to the idea that you get can ahead by showing initiative and entrepreneurship should be enough.

    Posted 29 Jun 2007 at 11:51 am

  14. canuckistani wrote:

    It’s an interesting plan.. I’d include any kind of national service, like doctoring in the remote north, teaching in slums, building low-income housing or levees in low-lying areas - not every good immigrant would make a good soldier.

    Posted 29 Jun 2007 at 12:00 pm

  15. BloodSpite wrote:

    I’d include any kind of national service, like doctoring in the remote north, teaching in slums, building low-income housing or levees in low-lying areas - not every good immigrant would make a good soldier.

    I’m cool with that.

    I’ve said before, despite my seemingly hard line stance, that I’m not against immigration.

    But I fear if we “make exception”, then later we’ll.. “Make another exception” and we end up on a slippery slope that no one can either stop, control or maintain.

    And thats a very dangerous status quo.

    Posted 29 Jun 2007 at 12:03 pm

  16. Dreggas wrote:

    JohnTheMarine,

    Couldn’t agree with your points more.

    Blood,

    Your system plan sounds exactly like the system behind the French Foreign Legion (say what you will about Frenchies, the Legionnaires are pretty bad ass). The entire point of the Foreign Legion was the fact that France, then still an empire, could not field armies of their own native citizens all over their empire. Therefore the legion was established and the reward for service in the legion was citizenship.

    My take on the whole matter is that as long as we’ve had immigration laws they’ve been FUBARED. From the quota systems we had to keep out Eastern Europeans back in the 19th and early 20th centuries to the quota systems we do have for our southern border currently.

    That being said, and me being one who believes if it’s broke, fix it and if it can’t be fixed then scrap it and start over. I think that we need to increase the size of the border patrol, there’s a lot of border patrolled by a very small number of people both to the north and south.

    Second we need to work with the governments of southern and central america towards improving their countries for their own people. People wonder why this is only a problem on the southern border and not the northern need to just look at the exchange rates for currency. Hell if I was a mexican having lived under the governments they’ve had I’d want to get the hell out too!

    Of course the second part takes a while, it requires the un-******* of a ****** up situation.

    Just my two cents.

    Posted 29 Jun 2007 at 12:17 pm

  17. Dreggas wrote:

    Blood,

    you mean like the exception back during the Reagan years…yeah we started on that slope already.

    And to be clear I have no problem with anyone of any race, creed, religion, orientation or anything coming to this country. I have a problem with those who come here in violation of the law and our sovereignty and basically squat while sending money back to south america. If you think that’s a bogeyman, come to where I live, there are money transfer places every other block advertising how cheaply they can send money to mexico.

    Posted 29 Jun 2007 at 12:20 pm

  18. BloodSpite wrote:

    you mean like the exception back during the Reagan years…yeah we started on that slope already.

    You got it in one dude ;)

    I’m glad we stopped it….*this* time.

    Posted 29 Jun 2007 at 12:22 pm

  19. John the Marine wrote:

    Usually I agree with Bloodspite, but not this time. Creating an Army of foreign nationals to fight our wars sounds more like late Western Rome than 19th century France and the legion. Just as an aside, the Legion is indeed bad ass because they don’t allow any wimpy Frenchies in. It is probably the only French military unit with guts.

    For me I don’t understand why we don’t enforce our laws or what is so radical about enforcing our laws. I don’t have an ax grind with anyone who wants to come here, but I expect them to show respect and follow the rules. All of them right from the start.

    Sorry Commie, but I don’t buy into the false equivalence between speeding and border jumping. Keep in mind that most countries put soldiers on their border who shoot people who try to cross illegally. Before you even start I’m not suggesting we shoot illegal immigrants. Maybe we could just send them to galleys for twenty years. Row well and live!

    Posted 29 Jun 2007 at 4:22 pm

  20. commissar wrote:

    canuckistani,

    … the remote north …

    Glad to hear you admit it!

    Posted 29 Jun 2007 at 4:54 pm

  21. canuckistani wrote:

    canuckistani,

    … the remote north …

    Glad to hear you admit it!

    Actually, I was thinking of Alaska, since we were discussing immigration to the US. Canada, as all Second City fans know, is the Great White North, not the remote north, and our biggest immigration question is what to do with American deserters.

    Posted 29 Jun 2007 at 6:09 pm

  22. Alon Levy wrote:

    John, in France, one Presidential candidate out of two openly said that the problem of illegal immigration began and ended with the poverty rate in the third world (she lost by 6 points). In Israel, the IDF goes to great pains to keep Palestinians from crossing the border illegally, but does nothing about the plethora of illegal Thai and Romanian and Chinese workers.

    Posted 29 Jun 2007 at 7:25 pm

  23. Dreggas wrote:

    For me I don’t understand why we don’t enforce our laws or what is so radical about enforcing our laws. I don’t have an ax grind with anyone who wants to come here, but I expect them to show respect and follow the rules. All of them right from the start.

    Agreed.

    Posted 29 Jun 2007 at 7:51 pm

  24. Redhand wrote:

    First all illegal immigrants are criminals by the very nature of their presence. By sneaking into the U.S. they have shown a complete disregard for our laws and the sovereignty of the United States.

    Ah, not exactly. Immigration law makes a distinction between (1) those who “sneak across the border,” or to put it more technically, “enter without inspection,” (they’re called EWI’s, rhymes with kiwis; and (2) those who are inspected and admitted but violate the conditions of their stay by remaining here beyond the period authorized when admitted, or who otherwise violate status, i.e. work without authorization.

    Only EWI’s commit a crime. You can look it up: 8 U.S.C. Section 1325(a). The law says EWI’s can be fined and imprisoned six months for the first offense, and up to two years for the second. Don’t ask me why it’s not enforced. Ask Chertoff.

    Overstays and status violators are subject to deportation (now called “removal”) as a civil penalty, but are not classified as criminals. I think the theory is that if they respect our laws enough to enter legally, their status violations are not crimes. I agree: it’s John Sensenbrenner, stonehead bullsh*t to consider such conduct a “crime,” much less a friggin’ felony, which is what he wanted to do last year.

    I’m admittedly prejudiced in this respect. EWI’s can’t get green cards by marrying Americans in a bona fide union; overstays can. This is one area where I think EWI’s definitely should be cut a break; make them pay a substantial fine when they apply for marriage based green cards, but show some leniency, and deference to the wishes of their American spouses, by letting them get apply for green cards.

    FWIW the last “amnesty,” which “expired” in April 2001 (it’s far more complicated than that, actually) let EWI spouses apply for green cards after paying an up-front $1000 fine when the filed their papers.

    Posted 29 Jun 2007 at 8:23 pm

« Trouble in Paradise
Strapping the dog to the roof of your car? »