Arizona's anti-imigration law...
- Thread starter Lue C Fur
- Start date
av8torntn
Well-Known Member
If you live and/or work in a state you are already paying for a state college to exist with your taxes.
moreluck
golden ticket member
I'm talking above & beyond that. I pay for grade schools too and have no kids under 38. That doesn't bother me because my kids made use of the public school systems.
"The California Supreme Court has reversed a lower court holding and sided with California Regents and illegal aliens on the issue of in-state tuition breaks. Under the latest ruling, California colleges (California State University, the University of California, and California Community Colleges) have been given the green light to offer tuition breaks to illegal aliens and deny the same benefit to U.S. citizens from other states. The case is available at the California courts website."
"The California Supreme Court has reversed a lower court holding and sided with California Regents and illegal aliens on the issue of in-state tuition breaks. Under the latest ruling, California colleges (California State University, the University of California, and California Community Colleges) have been given the green light to offer tuition breaks to illegal aliens and deny the same benefit to U.S. citizens from other states. The case is available at the California courts website."
We need to focus on the real problem of immigration... We can all fight with each other about it, but until "we" as a people understand the complexities of immigration, it will never be solved.
Republicans want us to believe that "they" are the most concerned about immigration and claim the democrats are the ones that want them here, yet, in disscussions with Obama, the republicans say they will not engage in immigration reform unless it INCLUDES an INCREASE in guest workers.
Story: 2009
WASHINGTON — President Obama told a bipartisan group of lawmakers on Thursday that Congress should begin debating a comprehensive immigration plan by year’s end or early next year, but Republicans said they would support a measure only if it included an expansion of guest worker programs.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/26/us/politics/26immig.html
Guest workers turn into illegal residents. Why is it so hard for republicans to understand that the very programs THEY want increased only leads to the type of illegal aliens they wish to remove?
What is the advantage to the american taxpayer of having these guest workers enter our country and never leave? The only winners in this process are the employers who hire them for lower than standard wages, pay them no benefits or holidays, then lose track of them when they simply escape into our country.
We the taxpayer end up subsidizing these employers by having our tax dollars spent on education, health care and the like when these guest workers get married and have children.
The concept the right wing is selling sez that these guest workers will simply walk across the border and go home after there time is up. Seriously?
Does anyone on this board really believe this happens?
Migrants will use whatever means necessary to enter this country and simply disapear like casper the friendly ghost. They know that "we" dont have the infrastructure to track them down and kick them out.
Republicans have made immigration worse every year they have had control of the white house and hill since ronald reagan, yet, campaign to blame the democrats.
People who dont really pay attention to the details go along with the claims and simply repeat the rhetoric.
John McCain himself would have granted amnesty if he was to have been elected president.
Peace.
Republicans want us to believe that "they" are the most concerned about immigration and claim the democrats are the ones that want them here, yet, in disscussions with Obama, the republicans say they will not engage in immigration reform unless it INCLUDES an INCREASE in guest workers.
Story: 2009
WASHINGTON — President Obama told a bipartisan group of lawmakers on Thursday that Congress should begin debating a comprehensive immigration plan by year’s end or early next year, but Republicans said they would support a measure only if it included an expansion of guest worker programs.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/26/us/politics/26immig.html
Guest workers turn into illegal residents. Why is it so hard for republicans to understand that the very programs THEY want increased only leads to the type of illegal aliens they wish to remove?
What is the advantage to the american taxpayer of having these guest workers enter our country and never leave? The only winners in this process are the employers who hire them for lower than standard wages, pay them no benefits or holidays, then lose track of them when they simply escape into our country.
We the taxpayer end up subsidizing these employers by having our tax dollars spent on education, health care and the like when these guest workers get married and have children.
The concept the right wing is selling sez that these guest workers will simply walk across the border and go home after there time is up. Seriously?
Does anyone on this board really believe this happens?
Migrants will use whatever means necessary to enter this country and simply disapear like casper the friendly ghost. They know that "we" dont have the infrastructure to track them down and kick them out.
Republicans have made immigration worse every year they have had control of the white house and hill since ronald reagan, yet, campaign to blame the democrats.
People who dont really pay attention to the details go along with the claims and simply repeat the rhetoric.
John McCain himself would have granted amnesty if he was to have been elected president.
Peace.
Oh, so now that John McCain comes out and shuts down the falsehood of waterboarding, you want to cast him aside??
This is why the republicans cannot find a message that resonates with the majority of voters.
Peace.
Nimnim
The Nim
More, while I can see where you're coming from here, you've left a huge hole in this. If after 65 people shouldn't have a hand in running a country, you must also revoke a person's voting rights as that is also a hand in running the country.
trplnkl
555
Good point...however.....Huge gap between deciding which lever to pull in a voting booth as opposed to deciding which button to push in the oval office.
I agree with More, at 65, you shouldnt be able to do alot of things, like post on blogs.
Peace.
trplnkl
555
We'll miss you around here, enjoy the retirement home.
SNAPPY
