The Official 2008 SuperHeroHype.com Presidential Election!

[Excel]

Excel, under my plan, parents already here in the United States, with children born on American soil, will be given amnesty.

Ok, but that contradicts this

Accordng to you, if you can sneak in, all you have to do is have a baby andf you can stay.

That is a HUGE HUGE HUGE national security risk

On the other hand, you want to do away with increasing our border security. You want to initiate an open door policy which would allow anyone into the country, assuming they undergo a background check and agree to check ups every two months.

Excuse me? Please show me where I have said this. I have said I want us to beef up our border patrol as well as Mexico

I am serious. Give me the quote.

Your open door policy is an open door to disaster

.

My plan has a lot more productive requirement than yours, which is to simply have a baby in the U.S.

In order for these people to be given citizenship, they will have to register with the government.

Not to mention, I will also tap their phones for a set period of time to ensure that they are not up to anything "suspicious."

Human rights? lease. And what if they are? Their THROWN OUT. What about no family seperation???

Your immigration policy has more holes than swiss cheese. You want to let anyone into the country, but you want to deport undocumented workers with U.S.-born children? You want to cut security and check ups, yet you think you'll keep America safe? You're just throwing things out in the open, hoping to please everybody.

Please show me where I have said this???

 

[SuBe]

When are the First debates? I would like to be one of the moderaters in the First Republican Debate.

 

[Excel]

The people who want to sneak into this country aren't sitting around going, "gee, senor, I wonder which American laws I can sneak around today!"

They seek opportunity.

The majority of them aren't going to go out and get knocked up simply so they can come here.

Or they seek to blow up buildings or fly planes into skyscrapers. Your contradicting yourself. Any National Security argument you try to have has now been forfieted.

 

[The Senator]

Ok, but that contradicts this

Accordng to you, if you can sneak in, all you have to do is have a baby andf you can stay.

That is a HUGE HUGE HUGE national security risk

As I've said, these immigrants are not going out to get knocked up simply because they will be given amnesty.

And the few who do will be under constant surveillance under FISA.

My plan has a lot more productive requirement than yours, which is to simply have a baby in the U.S.

You want to let anyone enter the United States though, with only temporary check ups every now and then... do you realize how silly that is? Undocumented workers with ill intentions can plot and scheme for two months before they carry out a terrorist attack. The parents who give birth to children and are given immediate amnesty in the U.S. will be under constant surveillance under FISA to ensure that they do not represent a significant threat.

Human rights? lease. And what if they are? Their THROWN OUT. What about no family seperation???

I don't understand which "human rights" are being violated. American phones have been tapped legally since the Carter administration (and possibly before that). If people represent a national security risk, then they need to be monitored. People who become automatic citizens will need to be monitored for a set period of time to ensure that they do not represent a threat to this country.

 

[The Senator]

Or they seek to blow up buildings or fly planes into skyscrapers. Your contradicting yourself. Any National Security argument you try to have has now been forfieted.

My border security plan will use state-of-the-art technology to capture undocumented workers.

My guest worker program will require prospective Americans to register in a database, where their progress will be monitored.

Those who will receive amnesty will be monitored by the NSA.

I don't see how this allows people the chance to blow up buildings. Of course, I can see how one check up every two months would give people the time to plan an attack on American soil-- but I don't see how people who are under surveillance represent a significant threat to national security

 

[StorminNorman]

I agree that it is a difficult situation. But what I am saying TO ALL OF YOU (Ex, Jman, Norm) is that potential terrorists are just as capable of putting up "family life" as a front for something far more dangerous.

I agree - there is risk there. But a terrorist that is willing to create the allusion of a family life is probably likely to find another way of getting here and staying here as it is.

I don't want to destroy families simply because there is a slim chance that one of them could possibly be a terrorist in disguise.

 

[Excel]

I am still waiting for you to show me those 2 quotes of mine you claim I said.

As I've said, these immigrants are not going out to get knocked up simply because they will be given amnesty.

Umm, yes they will. Are you serious? People go across the ocean on pieces of cardbord to get here, theyll do whatever they got to stay.

You want to let anyone enter the United States though

Now a 3rd time. Show me where I said anyone can get in. In my plan, you can only get in legally if you pass the nessecary requirements, and if you come in illegally, you can only stay if you have been a productive, law abiding citizen. You will than be placed under survailance with a bi monthly meeting.

with only temporary check ups every now and then... do you realize how silly that is? Undocumented workers with ill intentions can plot and scheme for two months before they carry out a terrorist attack. The parents who give birth to children and are given immediate amnesty in the U.S. will be under constant surveillance under FISA to ensure that they do not represent a significant threat.

Of course they would be watched, I said that already...man you have a real serious habbit of only reading what you want to read.

I don't understand which "human rights" are being violated. American phones have been tapped legally since the Carter administration (and possibly before that). If people represent a national security risk, then they need to be monitored. People who become automatic citizens will need to be monitored for a set period of time to ensure that they do not represent a threat to this country.

I dnot think you realize just how busy fisa would be under your adminstartion

 

[Marx]

So you advocate an open door policy?

Pretty much. Obviously not just ANYBODY can come here-a more specific answer in my opinion is everybody has a right come here as long as they meet the limited requirements just make sure they are not known fugatives or terrorists or what have you..

Here's the quotes for you Ex.

That was where we all have gotten the idea that you advocate an "Open Door."

 

[Excel]

My border security plan will use state-of-the-art technology to capture undocumented workers.

People can act easily you know.

My guest worker program will require prospective Americans to register in a database, where their progress will be monitored.

Ok, that is exactly the same as mine...

Those who will receive amnesty will be monitored by the NSA

.

Again, it wont be hard to front a family or job.

I don't see how this allows people the chance to blow up buildings. Of course, I can see how one check up every two months would give people the time to plan an attack on American soil-- but I don't see how people who are under surveillance represent a significant threat to national security

Than you are very naive.

 

[The Senator]

Umm, yes they will. Are you serious? People go across the ocean on pieces of cardbord to get here, theyll do whatever they got to stay.

Please show me the story where someone came over here on a piece of cardboard-- I need a good read.

But, considering the majority of those who come over here are highly religious, I strongly doubt that women will have a child simply for citizenship reasons only.

Now a 3rd time. Show me where I said anyone can get in. In my plan, you can only get in legally if you pass the nessecary requirements, and if you come in illegally, you can only stay if you have been a productive, law abiding citizen. You will than be placed under survailance with a bi monthly meeting.

Now you're changing your position. There was no constant surveillance in your original plan. You only called for a meeting every two months to check up on these folks' progress. There was no mention of a "productive, law abiding citizen" clause in the citizenship process.

Of course they would be watched, I said that already...man you have a real serious habbit of only reading what you want to read.

Right, you said they'd be watched... once every two months... meaning they really won't be watched all that much...

I dnot think you realize just how busy fisa would be under your adminstartion

First of all, FISA is a piece of legislation-- it is an inanimate object and therefore, it cannot be busy.

Second, the NSA, which adheres to FISA regulations, would probably be as busy as they are now. You would be surprised as to how many phones are legally tapped in this country...

 

[The Senator]

Also, thanks to TheMarx for pulling up those quotes

 

[Excel]

Here's the quotes for you Ex.

That was where we all have gotten the idea that you advocate an "Open Door."

I am glad you found that. Read the second sentence.

Obviously not just ANYBODY can come here

But this is what jman got out of it...

You want to let anyone enter the United States

Jman either cannot read or is just responding to certain parts of my post, both which recieve a big

And I am still waiting on the one where I appearently said I want to "do awaywith border patrol".

 

[The Senator]

People can act easily you know.

You mean they can change their body temperature to match that of a nearby rock in order for them to avoid being caught by infrared scanners

Ok, that is exactly the same as mine...

Right, after you adopted that position once you realized how lopsided your immigration plan really is.

Again, it wont be hard to front a family or job.

Less than a handful of people are really going to go out of their way to act as if they are raising a family.

Than you are very naive.

Please, says the person who thinks we should open our borders up to everyone while we let other countries walk all over our laws...

 

[Excel]

But, considering the majority of those who come over here are highly religious, I strongly doubt that women will have a child simply for citizenship reasons only.

Again, are you serious? People murder, rob, and flee to try and stay here...you think that people wont just have a baby so they can stay LEGALLY?

You are way too naive dude.

Now you're changing your position. There was no constant surveillance in your original plan. You only called for a meeting every two months to check up on these folks' progress. There was no mention of a "productive, law abiding citizen" clause in the citizenship process.

Um, yes there was, go back and reread my posts.

First of all, FISA is a piece of legislation-- it is an inanimate object and therefore, it cannot be busy.

Second, the NSA, which adheres to FISA regulations, would probably be as busy as they are now. You would be surprised as to how many phones are legally tapped in this country...

Cool, when anybody who has a baby in the U.S. is free to stay, th eamount of phones tapped will triple.

 

[Marx]

I am glad you found that. Read the second sentence.



But this is what jman got out of it...



Jman either cannot read or is just responding to certain parts of my post, both which recieve a big

And I am still waiting on the one where I appearently said I want to "do awaywith border patrol".

Jman pulled the same information out of it that I did. And that Matt did. Matt asked you if you advocate an "open door." To which you said "pretty much." You did say that there are requirements, but you did say "pretty much" which usually can be seen as a "yes."

 

[The Senator]

I am glad you found that. Read the second sentence.



But this is what jman got out of it...



Jman either cannot read or is just responding to certain parts of my post, both which recieve a big

Um, I don't see how you can say that you "pretty much" advocate an open door policy, then say "not ANYBODY can come here." You're contradicting yourself. So what is it-- an open door policy, or tighter border security?

It's kind of hard for you to get your message across when you make so many contradictions...

 

[Excel]

Please, says the person who thinks we should open our borders up to everyone while we let other countries walk all over our laws...

Enough. I have atleast given you the courtesy of reading and responding to your entire posts. I am done with you until our debates. I have stated in multiple posts and multiple responses that

1. to get in here, you gotta pass the requirements and backround checks to make sure you have no history violence, terrorism, any of that crap; check a list of associates, and plans for the future in the U.S.

2. To stay here you must be a productive, law abiding citizen. Bi monthly check ins combined with local surveillence will keep them in line.

 

[The Senator]

Cool, when anybody who has a baby in the U.S. is free to stay, th eamount of phones tapped will triple.

And I have no problem with that, because families will be able to stay together and the wiretaps will allow us to keep America safer

 

[Excel]

Jman pulled the same information out of it that I did. And that Matt did. Matt asked you if you advocate an "open door." To which you said "pretty much." You did say that there are requirements, but you did say "pretty much" which usually can be seen as a "yes."

Ok, I will be as specific as possible.

There is an "open door" to applying for greencard. Everybody has a right to apply for one. You have to pass the requirements in order to achieve it.

Is that more clear?

 

[Marx]

Well with me, there would be something defiently in place. Kind of like probation, I guess you could say. It would be a monthly or bi-monthly check in with the person. If the person with a tempoary visa is not doing what they were expected to do (work, stay out of trouble, live life), they have to leave. There are no doubt others who want to come here to work, and I'd let them instead.

Illegal that are caught will be detained and their American lives reviewed. If they have been working, or have a family, and have stayed out of trouble, they can stay but will go to the back of the line for a green card and will be granted a temporary visa. If they have caused trouble or have been lazy and dont have any sort of family, they will be returned to where they came from. However, this could create the problem of coming here, starting a family, and living off the government which I wont do. Staying here would require work and if its not met, the family would be sent back together.

But again this all begins with much stricter border security which I would want to be a joint effort between the U.S. and Mexico.

I do not see any statement suggesting that they would be under continued surveillance. All you have said (originally) was that you would put in place a series of check-ups in which the alien is to be evaluated every 1-2 months.

 

[The Senator]

Enough. I have atleast given you the courtesy of reading and responding to your entire posts. I am done with you until our debates. I have stated in multiple posts and multiple responses that

1. to get in here, you gotta pass the requirements and backround checks to make sure you have no history violence, terrorism, any of that crap; check a list of associates, and plans for the future in the U.S.

2. To stay here you must be a productive, law abiding citizen. Bi monthly check ins combined with local surveillence will keep them in line.

You also said that we are better than Mexico, which deports and imprisons its illegal immigrants. You said that we shouldn't have strict immigration laws because we are "better than that."

You're a walking contradiction... but hey, if you want to suspend your campaign because you can't answer the tough questions, then go ahead...

 

[Excel]

And I have no problem with that, because families will be able to stay together and the wiretaps will allow us to keep America safer

There are ways to communicate other than phone

Your policys a 9/11 sequel waiting to happen

and with that I am done.

 

[The Senator]

There are ways to communicate other than phone

Your policys a 9/11 sequel waiting to happen

and with that I am done.

You do realize that the NSA can monitor the internet?

And cell phones?

And that phone companies which offer internet service have the means to access a person's online record?

Unless they communicate telepathically, it will be pretty tough for these folks to plot a terrorist attack.

 

[Excel]

You also said that we are better than Mexico, which deports and imprisons its illegal immigrants. You said that we shouldn't have strict immigration laws because we are "better than that."

This is getting funny...I have said it. Numerous times. If you are caught here illegal. You can get a tempoary visa. As long as you have and remain a productive citizen. If not, you are gone.

Theres no walking contradiction; all there is you being unable to read an entire post.

 

[Marx]

Ok, I will be as specific as possible.

There is an "open door" to applying for greencard. Everybody has a right to apply for one. You have to pass the requirements in order to achieve it.

Is that more clear?

I appreciate the clarification. In your original post, I don't recall reading anything about an "open door to apply for a green card." I took it as "Open Door" meaning open door...because that is what was said.