He also says he is for the First Amendment, but McCain-Feingold puts the lie to that position, as well.

I like McCain and respect him, but I don’t agree with his policy.

I don’t think you can jail or deport the illegals. Just enforce the laws on the books and watch them leave on their own, just as they are streaming into Texas from Arizona and Oklahoma right now. Every time a local community starts some form of enforcement (housing, business licenses,etc) the local contractors complain of labor shortages becasue the illegals haul ass on their own.

Reduce the demand for illegal aliens by penalizing employers for hiring them and watch the supply dwindle.

Allow local police organizations to check immigration status and watch the illegal aliens self-deport.

Improve the social standing of legal immigrants by removing the suspicion that all Latino immigrants are illegal and watch their employment and social opportunities improve.

Every candidate, except for a few, are pandering to the Hispanic vote by refusing to articulate reasonable and effective ways to secure our border. They have learned that recognizing illegal aliens as a threat to this country, and proposing steps to stop them, will get you called a bigot, coward, pathetic, anit-immigration, racist, etc etc Therefore, they talk about a “path to citizenship”.

If they were getting paid to do it we could call them whores, instead they are just sluts.

BTW, 12 million is nowhere even close. That number was from 2000 and census bureau estimates are about 600,000 net gains in illegal aliens each year.

From McCain’s web site: “As president, I will secure the border. I will restore the trust Americans should have in the basic competency of their government. A secure border is an essential element of our national security.”

or

“They want the border secured first. And I will do that, and, as president, I will have the border state governors certify those borders are secured.”

McCain – Kennedy is the opposite of border enforcement.

“path to legalization” translates as “citizenship for illegal aliens who broke our laws to get here”. I can’t support.

Sorry, T.

Btw, your characterization of McCain as an “amnesty-for-illegals/no-secure-border politician” is wrong. McCain, like the Dems’ stances on illegal immigration, says you have to secure the borders first, then provide a path to legalization for those already here. I am not saying I agree with him, just providing clarification.

Love – Mr. T

Yes, participating in the political process and making your wishes for legitimate enforcement of our laws is the epitome of “cowardly” and “pathetic”. By that standard, the people who prosecuted the Sixteenth Street Church bombing in Birmingham were “pathetic” “cowards” for asking that the law be enforced when their little girls were murdered.

“no money, (hard to make a good living when you can’t access employment because of LONG EXISTING ID requirements for the I-9) no health care (because of no money and employer benefits available to legal workers, except for the clinics and emergency rooms crowded with illegals), no drivers licenses (yeah, let’s license people who have no insurance and many of whom can barely read a street sign, GREAT IDEA!!!), no vote (another reason for no drivers license and a good reason for picture ID at the polls) and are often far from their families (boo hoo, it’s their choice)

“its a lot harder to admit our own faults.” You mean as when a person would say “I am so blinded by my personal politics that I can’t understand why people would be upset about this. Illegal aliens, especially the criminal ones, are wonderfull for the diversity of our community!!! They don’t agree with me so they must be ignorant bigots who can’t “prove” what they say” since they don’t have proof these people are illegal aliens.”

Given that McCain is the GOP leader of the amnesty-for-illegals/no-secure-border politicians, do you think she is attacking the illegal aliens or the politicians who refuse to secure our borders?

Do you think the description you gave of the “scapegoats” would be as accurate if they were here legally with proper documentation and more difficult to exploit?

“There are plenty of good reasons to be concerned about illegal immigration. Graffiti isn’t one of them.”

Unless, of course, you own the property that will now require repainting or have to suffer the increased crime in an area tagged by a gang. Yes, I am aware that all grafitti is not gang tagging. I have a feeling she was showing the grafitti as indicator of the declining environment in which she lives. So is your position that grafitti is a) not a problem b) not related to the massive influx of illegal immigrants in Gwinnett or what?

“How does she know the legal status of the people who sprayed that graffiti?”

How about, oh I don’t know, common sense and local knowledge? How do YOU know the status of the taggers? Kind of like people saying those hookers on Piedmont and Fourth “could just be walking to a party, how can you know they are hookers?”.

When I see bird shit on my car, I don’t ask “How do I know a bird left it?”. Granted, it is possible the graftti is done by legal residents on the way home from work or school, but crime statictics tell us that is probably not the case. I see a few gang tags in there, do you think the Latino gangs in the area are staffed by legal residents? If so, you have information that law enforcement would like to have. What does that say about the effect of these “immigrants” onthe neighborhood.

Mr T. – I guess you were being sarcastic, but sometimes I can’t tell if you are being funny or serious. It isn’t “hating” foreigners to ask that illegal aliens come here legally and respect our laws.

I wrote the caption, but because the bulk of the entry was Joeff’s photos, I gave him the credit on the blog post. My apologies for the confusion.

There are plenty of good reasons to be concerned about illegal immigration. Graffiti isn’t one of them.

How does she know the legal status of the people who sprayed that graffiti?

Andy