My Position on Illegal Immigration

INTRODUCITION

This position paper IS NOT about taking a position against immigration. This paper IS about drawing the distinction between LEGAL and ILLEGAL immigration. As is the case with most Americans (in this paper, Americans are defined as those who are citizens of the United States), all my ancestors at one time or another immigrated to the U.S. It may also interest you to know that I am married to a Latin lady who also immigrated to this great country. However, let it be known that my ancestors and my wife immigrated to the U.S. LEGALLY.

This paper is also about proposing a reasonable and fair plan for slowing down the tide of illegal immigration and dealing with the illegal immigrants who are already in the U.S. I fully understand that most of the people who enter the U.S. illegally from Latin America are looking for opportunities to work and make a better life for themselves. I also acknowledge that there are a lot of jobs in the American job market that illegal immigrants will take that a lot of Americans are less inclined to take. However, as true as this may be, the fact is that we have approximately 15 million illegal immigrants living in the U.S. today and it is taking its toll on the American health, education, welfare and criminal justice systems and our economy.

PREVENTING ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION

When addressing this whole topic of illegal immigration, it is very easy for Americans to look upon illegal immigrants with contempt because they are violating the law. The fact of the matter is, the Americans need to first look at themselves in the mirror and realize that they are just as much a part of the problem with illegal immigration as the illegal immigrants are. The reason illegal immigrants are here is because American businesses are willing to provide illegal jobs for them. The American consumer is willing to buy products from companies that hire illegal immigrants. So, while I do support some changes in our immigration laws, I also think that our government should enforce the laws that we already have concerning businesses that hire illegal immigrants.

One of the problems with the U.S. immigration policy (besides the lack of enforcement) is that it is actually easier and more convenient for someone to come here illegally than legally. So, the answer to this problem is quite simple. The U.S. Government needs to come up with a way to make it more convenient to enter the country legally while at the same time coming up with a way to make it more difficult to enter illegally. Therefore, I am in favor of granting some sort of guest worker permits for those who immigrants who want to find work and can pass a criminal background check and a physical. And I am in favor of closing the border with Mexico by building a wall on the entire length of the border. Furthermore, I think we should hire legal immigrants with guest worker permits to build the wall because this type of project will provide a lot of jobs for several years.

ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS WHO ARE ALREADY IN THE U.S.

I am not in favor of granting amnesty to those illegal immigrants who are already in the U.S. However, I am in favor setting up a system that will enable them to become legal residents and remain living in the U.S. Here are a few of the conditions I think illegal immigrants should meet in order to be allowed to stay:
· Pass a criminal background check;
· Pay a fine and processing fee of $2,000.00;
· Forfeit the right to become a U.S. citizen;
· Forfeit the right to receive public welfare and medical benefits;
· Score at least a 70% on a standardized English proficiency test.

I think those who do not meet the above conditions with in a reasonable timeframe shall be deported. If one does not have the $2,000.00, they can work it off by helping the U.S. Government build the wall on the border. If an illegal immigrant meets those conditions, then I think their children who were born in the U.S. should be considered legal U.S. citizens. Otherwise, the law should be changed and not allow children of illegal immigrants to be U.S. citizens automatically. Their children should be required to wait until they adults to seek citizenship if they so choose.

CONCLUSION

If you are an illegal immigrant please don’t think that I hate you. Or, that I hate Latin people in general. As I have already stated, my wife is Latin and we both attending a Spanish speaking church and I am learning to speak your language. If you don’t agree with what I just wrote, that is okay. The ideas expressed in this paper are solely my opinions on how I think things should be.

At this point in time, I doubt that any of my ideas will actually be implemented anyway. So, you should not have much to worry about. However, let me give you a few facts that you might find interesting. Did you know that:
· The Mexican Constitution prohibits their immigrants from protesting against the Mexican government at anytime;
· Being an illegal immigrant in Mexico is a felony with a possible punishment of two years in prison;
· A legal immigrant or naturalized citizen in Mexico can be deported at anytime without due process;
· A naturalized Mexican citizen cannot:
Run for public office;
Be a officer in the Mexican military
Be a member of the clergy.
· Mexican Soldiers are stationed at their boarder with Guatemala to prevent illegal entry into their country;
· The Mexican Government does not provide public welfare benefits to their immigrants;
· Bilingual education does not exist in the Mexican school systems;
· The Mexican Government requires their immigrants to speak Spanish when conducting government related business;
· Mexico deports more illegal immigrants a year than does the U.S.

Do you think it would be fair if the U.S. did whatever Mexico does about immigration?

BHO and The Teleprompter

Carol E. Lee of Yahoo News broke a story on March 5th about BHO using teleprompters for all of his speaking engagements regardless of the size of the event. She made the point that past Presidents only used the teleprompter in the larger venues and that it is a bit unusual for BHO to use it all the time. Carol went on to report how the teleprompter proved to be awkward and cumbersome in smaller speaking venues such as press briefings where the President announced his cabinet selections. She also reported that the teleprompter make work "tricky for the television crews and photographers" and suggested that it could be a "crutch" or a "safety net."

One thing I learned a long time ago is that communication (especially public speaking) is an art form. So, there is no one absolute single technique or tool one should use that is superior to another. Although, I would have to agree that using a teleprompter at a press briefing seems a bit over the top and it would not be something that I would use, I say if BHO feels more comfortable using it and he feels more effective with it, then more power to him. As a conservative, ultimately, I am much more concerned about the words and the message that BHO is communicating than the communication tools that he is using.

If I may, I would like to offer some advice to BHO in case he or one of his staff happens to read this piece. Before the technology was available to make teleprompters possible, people were using cue cards. A teleprompter is nothing more than an electronic cue card anyway. Although a hard copy cue card does have it limitations, it would be a lot more versatile than a teleprompter in the smaller venues. This is what one of your predecessors did. His name was Ronald Reagan. Try it, you might be surprised how effective it is.

GW Bush was much maligned by his opposition for being, "dumb" and "stupid" throughout presidency. The next time I hear a liberal impugn W's intellect, I will have my snappy comeback ready to go. I will just say, "Well at least he did not need to use a teleprompter at his press briefings!"

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE PICTURES

Judging from the montage of photos above, one would think that BHO loves babies. Before you continue down that path and draw any conclusions, you might want to first give pause. One key thing to keep in mind is that all nine of those babies have one thing in common. They all have already been born. While he may have the appearance of loving the born babies, BHO’s track record concerning the civil rights and protection of unborn babies is another thing altogether.

In August of 2008, he responded this way to a question from Rick Warren concerning the issue of when a baby gets human rights: “Well, uh, you know. I think whether you’re looking at life from a theological perspective or, uh, a scientific perspective, uh, answering that question with specificity is, is, is, uh, above my pay grade.” That answer sure had a lot of stammering and stuttering from a guy who is lauded to be so articulate by his followers. BHO was a US Senator at the time he made that statement. The annual salary of a US Senator these days is $169,300. So, based on his answer, am I to assume that the average Theologian and Scientist makes more money than BHO did as a US Senator?

If you look at BHO’s track record as a politician, you will see that he has already made the decsion about the human rights of the unborn. The National Right to Life News reported in the January 2009 publication that:
“During his years in the Illinois state Senate, (1994-2004), Obama was a leader in opposing pro-life legislation, including bills to ban partial-birth abortions and the protect infants who are born alive during abortions. During his four years in the U. S. Senate (2005-08), he always voted against the pro-life side, and he cosponsored the so-called “Freedom of Choice Act” (FOCA), a proposed federal law that would invalidate virtually all limits on abortion.”

On January 23, 2009, BHO signed an Executive Order that will channel millions of taxpayer dollars towards organizations that promote abortion as a means of population-control in third-worl contries. This EO overturns a policy known as the “Mexico City Policy” which stipulates that any overseas population assistance funds coming from the US shall not go to those organizations that perform or promote abortions.

I realize that when any politician runs for most any kind of public office, holding babies for a photo op. is part of territory. However, don’t you think it is just a bit ironic, if not even down right hypocritical for Pro-Abortion politicians to use babies for photo ops? If the mothers of those nine babies in the above pictures chose to hire a hit man and have those babies stuffed out at their local abortion mills when they were all still at the pre-born stage of their development, that would have been nine less babies BHO could have gravy-trained for his photo ops.