The Official 2008 SuperHeroHype.com Presidential Election!

[Excel]

Jman I have to ask; are those directed at my policies mentined here? And be honest.

 

[The Senator]

Jman I have to ask; are those directed at my policies mentined here? And be honest.

They are directed towards anyone who believes in an open door immigration policy...

 

[Excel]

Well I think the other will join in my saying scaring people into voting for you is not cool because it is not accurate.

Buts its ok because those werent directed at me

 

[The Senator]

Well I think the other will join in my saying scaring people into voting for you is not cool because it is not accurate.

How do you know? If you let anyone come over here and only offer temporary checkups on them, then that could give them plenty of time to plot and execute a terrorist attack. It's probably highly unlikely, but under the wrong policies and loose loopholes, it could happen.

Buts its ok because those werent directed at me

I'm glad you think so.

 

[Excel]

How do you know? If you let anyone come over here and only offer temporary checkups on them, then that could give them plenty of time to plot and execute a terrorist attack. It's probably highly unlikely, but under the wrong policies and loose loopholes, it could happen.

We all need to live in reality. A terrorist attack could happen under ANY policy. There is nobody here with a perfect solution. I dont offer temporary check ups- its check ups ever 2 months until they recieve citizenship.

"highly unlikely" is about as good as its gonna get unless we stop letting people in all together.

 

[The Senator]

We all need to live in reality.

Yes. We must all realize that an open door solution is not going to work, and that it could represent a threat to our national security.

A terrorist attack could happen under ANY policy.

Correct. But it is most likely to happen under policies which would make it easier for terrorists to attack us.

I dont offer temporary check ups- its check ups ever 2 months until they recieve citizenship.

Those strike me as temporary check ups. You want to let people go months without being checked in on. A lot can happen in a month's time. People can open up a drug ring, they can plot an attack against our people, they can join a gang and cause chaos there... you are basically ensuring that people will be given a free pass, except for once every two months when a government employee "checks up on them" (which, for all we know, could consist of a five minute "hello" and the exchanging of signatures).

"highly unlikely" is about as good as its gonna get unless we stop letting people in all together.

And if we let anyone come here, those chances increase ten fold.

 

[Excel]

Correct. But it is most likely to happen under policies which would make it easier for terrorists to attack us.

That is quite obvious.

Those strike me as temporary check ups. You want to let people go months without being checked in on. A lot can happen in a month's time. People can open up a drug ring, they can plot an attack against our people, they can join a gang and cause chaos there... you are basically ensuring that people will be given a free pass, except for once every two months when a government employee "checks up on them" (which, for all we know, could consist of a five minute "hello" and the exchanging of signatures).

No free pass at all. Theyll have to report on earnings and purchases; we'll know if they are making money illegally; we'll have a monitor on theyre activites; but we cannot infringe on their human rights either.

And if we let anyone come here, those chances increase ten fold.

Agreed, which is why I have stated there would be tough requirements to be met in roder to achieve one of these temporary visa's.

 

[Marx]

Also agreed; this is actually one of the few things that annoys me greatly.

In noway do I mean that. Mexicos role in our immigration policy would be 3 things

-help along the border
-help when detained illegals are sent back (if they are)
-help with backround checks for people trying to enter legally.

Thats about it.

It really comes across to me as though you would advocate a foreign government's role in the configuration of our immigration policies within the United States.

I do think that Mexico needs more of a presence on their own side of the border. It could help, but I'm not entirely convinced of that. As for a foreign government running background checks for people trying to enter legally, I strongly disagree. I do not believe that any government in their right mind would accept a background check of that extent conducted by a foreign government as sufficient evidence. Things can be forged easier than you may think.

Case in point, Mexican Consular Cards. They are largly sold out of the backs of trucks.

The system I would do would end it's bimonthly check ups after 2 years and require meetinge every six months until the person becomes a U.S. citizen.

I completely understand your "check ups" aspect of this, but what I am saying is that you are still working under the assumption that they will actually show up for the meeting. (Which is no different from the way things currently run.) What if they don't show up? Are you going to issue an arrest warrant?

The best example I can provide is this - In the cases concerning illegal alien criminals, they are arrested...some are detained, some are then let go...but all are expected to show up for their hearing before the judge.

Can you guess what happens next? They don't show up for the hearings. The ones that actually are successfully deported, end up coming right back into the country. This isn't a hypothetical situation either, this happens.

With all due respect, you are still working largely under the same premise as things stand in our government now.

Than it's the parents call. The child has a right to be here and a right to be with his family. If they wanted to put him in a group home or with friends/family here till they can legally comeback that would be an option, or they could take him with them and he would be free to come back on his house whenever he wishes as long as he had identification.

I do agree that it is the parents call.

 

[The Senator]

 

[The Senator]

Excel
Than it's the parents call. The child has a right to be here and a right to be with his family. If they wanted to put him in a group home or with friends/family here till they can legally comeback that would be an option, or they could take him with them and he would be free to come back on his house whenever he wishes as long as he had identification.

 

[Marx]

^What do you mean "vote against the separation of families" Candidate Spice? What is your stance when it concerns the children of illegal aliens?

 

[The Senator]

^What do you mean vote against the separation of families Candidate Spice? What is your stance when it concerns the children or illegal aliens?

I believe that those who give birth to children in the United States should be given amnesty. I am against the separation of families for trivial matters, and I am against deporting U.S. citizens because their parents are of a different nationality.

 

[Marx]

I believe that those who give birth to children in the United States should be given amnesty. I am against the separation of families for trivial matters, and I am against deporting U.S. citizens because their parents are of a different nationality.

That is essentially a decree saying "if you come to the US illegally...but birth children...you are granted amnesty!" There is already a huge problem of illegal aliens coming into the country - marrying - then having children because they know the children will automatically become citizens. Who ends up paying for all of these children?

Make no mistake about it, I feel horribly for these kids, they did not ask to be put into the situation that they are in, but their parents knew what they were doing. Unfortunately, the children end up being the ones to suffer.

 

[StorminNorman]

I would push to amend the 14th Amendment and change the definition of Natural Born Citizen. Citizenship should extend to children who have at least one parent who is an American citizen and shall no longer be extended to children of two illegal immigrants in the country. The original attention of this Amendment has been corrupted by illegal immigrants coming into America - we must end the use of anchor babies.

If a spouse and parent is illegal, then they would have the ability to apply for similar status given to illegal immigrants in America my first six months as President: legal status in the country for five years after which they must complete the U.S. Citizenship test. I don't want to see families separated.

 

[The Senator]

That is essentially a decree saying "if you come to the US illegally...but birth children...you are granted amnesty!" There is already a huge problem of illegal aliens coming into the country - marrying - then having children because they know the children will automatically become citizens. Who ends up paying for all of these children?

Make no mistake about it, I feel horribly for these kids, they did not ask to be put into the situation that they are in, but their parents knew what they were doing. Unfortunately, the children end up being the ones to suffer.

I do not believe children should have to suffer because of a decision their parents made.

If my father murders someone, does that mean I should go to jail with him?

If my mother came here illegally, should I have to be deported with her?

These children are American citizens under the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. They deserve the same rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as everyone else. They don't deserve to see their parents taken away and sent back to Mexico.

And you know who pays for these children? The parents. Under my immigration plan, while these folks will be granted amnesty, they will need to find employment, they will need to provide for themselves. They will have the same responsibilities as every other American. And since I plan to cut welfare hand outs, these folks will need to either find a job or find employment with my Public Works Program. There will be no mooching off the government.

 

[Marx]

I would push to amend the 14th Amendment and change the definition of Natural Born Citizen. Citizenship should extend to children who have at least one parent who is an American citizen and shall no longer be extended to children of two illegal immigrants in the country. The original attention of this Amendment has been corrupted by illegal immigrants coming into America - we must end the use of anchor babies.

If a spouse and parent is illegal, then they would have the ability to apply for similar status given to illegal immigrants in America my first six months as President: legal status in the country for five years after which they must complete the U.S. Citizenship test. I don't want to see families separated.

The problem is Norm that there is alot of illegal aliens that come into the country, marry american citizens, to have children and begin a pathway to citizenship. They are still entering into the country illegally. It isn't just situations in which both parents are illegal, there are incredible numbers of one illegal parent and an american citizen.

 

[Excel]

That is a response to my post?

I am not gonna get into smear campaigns; all I will say is that I would think a President should, at the very least, be able to read, something you have just demonstrated you cannot do.

It is the parents call. The child can stay here in a group home (not be adopted) or with family/friends who have green cards or visas until the parents can get back in here or the parents can take her back with them.

That said, your the one preaching about letting anybody in. All you gotta do under your law is come in here and have a kid and your good to stay. Well thats easy than. If I wanna blow up a building in NYC, all I have to do is sneak in with an 8 month pregnant girl, have the baby in the U.S., and I cant get kicked out!

Your taking far too many pages out of Hillarys playbook and thats unfortunate.

 

[Excel]

It really comes across to me as though you would advocate a foreign government's role in the configuration of our immigration policies within the United States.

Oh. Well, thats not correct man.

I do think that Mexico needs more of a presence on their own side of the border. It could help, but I'm not entirely convinced of that. As for a foreign government running background checks for people trying to enter legally, I strongly disagree. I do not believe that any government in their right mind would accept a background check of that extent conducted by a foreign government as sufficient evidence. Things can be forged easier than you may think.

We would be the ones conducting it, we just might some assistance from the Mexican government seeing as the said people have been living in that country.

I completely understand your "check ups" aspect of this, but what I am saying is that you are still working under the assumption that they will actually show up for the meeting. (Which is no different from the way things currently run.) What if they don't show up? Are you going to issue an arrest warrant?

Police visit to they're home. If they are not there they have a 24 hour window to contact police or the state. If not, than yes, arrest warrant. If it was some accident and they couldnt make it, itll be wiped off their record.

Can you guess what happens next? They don't show up for the hearings. The ones that actually are successfully deported, end up coming right back into the country. This isn't a hypothetical situation either, this happens.

Again, much stricter border control on both sides.

 

[StorminNorman]

The problem is Norm that they is alot of illegal aliens that come into the country, marry american citizens, to have children and begin a pathway to citizenship. They are still entering into the country illegally. It isn't just situations in which both parents are illegal, there are incredible numbers of one illegal parent and an american citizen.

I understand, but I do believe that illegals that have the foundation of family do not cause a great risk to America itself.

I do not believe the way I do on illegal immigration because I am afraid of the foreigner looking for a better life, I want to stop illegal immigration because of the security risk.

I believe those that have established families are far less likely to be a risk.

Its a difficult issue with no correct answer. We can only do the best we can and I believe this is the most rational, compassionate and sensible way to handle it.

 

[Excel]

As I said before, all one would have to do is sneak in with a pregnant women and have the baby in the U.S. and they are good to stay.

That, literally, means anybody could get in.

 

[Marx]

I do not believe children should have to suffer because of a decision their parents made.

I don't either, but the point remains that it is the parent inflicting this situation upon their child.

If my father murders someone, does that mean I should go to jail with him?

If my mother came here illegally, should I have to be deported with her?

The first situation isn't even comparable. The second situation is what I am referring to. If your mother is illegal, but you are born in this country and are a citizen, that's where it becomes complicated.

These children are American citizens under the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. They deserve the same rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as everyone else. They don't deserve to see their parents taken away and sent back to Mexico.

And you know who pays for these children? The parents. Under my immigration plan, while these folks will be granted amnesty, they will need to find employment, they will need to provide for themselves. They will have the same responsibilities as every other American. And since I plan to cut welfare hand outs, these folks will need to either find a job or find employment with my Public Works Program. There will be no mooching off the government.

I still feel that the blame lies on the parents. No child should have to suffer for the mistakes of their parents, but at the same time, the parents knew what the consequences were. I would support a Public Works Program, I'm just not keen on the idea of granting any illegal who becomes a parent or births a child, amnesty. I see that morphing into another HUGE problem. More and more illegals would realize that all they need to do is become pregnant or get someone else pregnant, then we have a baby boom and an amnesty boom to boot! And that essentially leads to "Ex's Open Door Policy." Which is a bad idea.

You know?

 

[Excel]

Marx mine is as secure as it can get while still being the land of opporitunity.

The overall deal is these parents have broken the law, and somebody is going to get screwed no matter what. It makes more sense to keep the family together and deport all of them while the child has the ability come bakc at any time in her life later on- then allowing them all to STAY.

Atleast with my plan, there are requirements to stay in the country such as working and being a productive and law abiding citizen. By your logic, you need to find a girl 8 months pregnant and sneak in, and you r are in the country.

It DOESNT get more open than that.

 

[The Senator]

That is a response to my post?

I am not gonna get into smear campaigns; all I will say is that I would think a President should, at the very least, be able to read, something you have just demonstrated you cannot do.

It is the parents call. The child can stay here in a group home (not be adopted) or with family/friends who have green cards or visas until the parents can get back in here or the parents can take her back with them.

That said, your the one preaching about letting anybody in. All you gotta do under your law is come in here and have a kid and your good to stay. Well thats easy than. If I wanna blow up a building in NYC, all I have to do is sneak in with an 8 month pregnant girl, have the baby in the U.S., and I cant get kicked out!

Your taking far too many pages out of Hillarys playbook and thats unfortunate.

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

My plan to increase border security by building a "virtual fence" and increasing the number of border patrol officers should stop a good percentage of people from coming over here illegally.

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.

Your open door policy is an open door to disaster.

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."

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.

 

[Marx]

Oh. Well, thats not correct man.

It's just the impression I get. If it is wrong, I apologize.

We would be the ones conducting it, we just might some assistance from the Mexican government seeing as the said people have been living in that country.

I agree that Mexican authorities may need to be contacted, but I thought you meant that Mexican authorities would be the ones conducting it. My mistake.

Police visit to they're home. If they are not there they have a 24 hour window to contact police or the state. If not, than yes, arrest warrant. If it was some accident and they couldnt make it, itll be wiped off their record.

Then we come into the problem of everyone claiming that it was a mistake. Then there are those who will move after one check up, and not register their new address. What then?

I understand, but I do believe that illegals that have the foundation of family do not cause a great risk to America itself.

I do not believe the way I do on illegal immigration because I am afraid of the foreigner looking for a better life, I want to stop illegal immigration because of the security risk.

I believe those that have established families are far less likely to be a risk.

Its a difficult issue with no correct answer. We can only do the best we can and I believe this is the most rational, compassionate and sensible way to handle it.

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.

 

[The Senator]

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.