I thought perhaps the President, Senators and Representatives and former Presidents, Senators and Represenatives.
Voter ID pattern is emerging.
- Thread starter rld
- Start date
Hate to tell you, but in fact I've worked for reasonable employer penalties and electronic employment eligibility checking.
Meanwhile it's US policy to have second class workers who have no rights, no protections, and no vote.
Back on topic, the voter ID laws are an attempt to prevent illegal immigrants from voting but without actually eliminating them. Thus it's really best viewed as part of the continuing oppression of four percent of the US population.
There, unintentionally you partially hit the nail, however they are also an attempt to keep people who are not domicilled in a particular state from voting there.
Yup, can't have those second class workers getting uppity and believing that they ought to have the same rights as anybody else. They might not work in unsafe conditions for next to no wages if they got that idea into their heads.
Considering the US (and most jurisdictions) don't extend the franchise to criminals and the illegals are by definition criminals....
Yup, it's a great strategy. You've got a work force of 12 million people and you've labelled the entire work force "criminal" to deny them of any possible employment rights, it's wonderful. You can exploit them, force them into unsafe conditions, and if they ever complain that the working conditions are too dangerous you can have them deported. Then hire another illegal who is less uppity and make him do the dangerous work. Hey, if a few people will die, probably nobody will ever even notice--just bury the body somewhere. They don't even really legally exist.
It's a wonderful strategy for exploiting people!
In fact, it works so well that I recommend the US keep on increasing the illegal share of the population--it's 4% of the US population now, if it could be raised up to 10% you really could build an apartheid system in the United States. It's honestly not far off the way Palestinians are treated in Syria, Jordan, and Lebanon.
Maybe you missed how many people were are talking about: We're talking about a share of the American population that is about double the size of the native population, and only slightly fewer of them than the number of asian americans. Hey, you're running a Mormon for President this year--do you know there are three times as many "illegals" in the US, as there are Mormons? This is the size of the group of people who are gainfully employed, crucial to the economy, and categorized as "illegal" so that they don't have to be paid the going rate, and so that they don't have to be afforded safe workplaces.
p.s. - just a little technicality, illegal immigrants are not by definition criminals, they simply have no lawful status, but that does not mean they are guilty of any misdemeanors or felonies.
Last edited:
Yepper!!!!!
GOPers have found a way to bring back Slavery of the good ole days!.....:Eek:
I might be wrong but entering the US (or any country) without that country's permission or staying beyond the time that has been allotted is a violation of law, ergo criminals.
Nope, it's not a violation of the criminal law. It's a violation of immigration law, which is different. Just like getting a speeding ticket doesn't make you a criminal, even though you have broken a law. You're only a "criminal" if you commit a criminal offense, meaning, one defined in the criminal code, rather than in some other code.
Illegal immigrants have no right to be in the United States under law, and so they can be deported by an immigration judge, but that's not a criminal court, deportation is not a sentence (it's a "removal order"), and they do not wind up with a criminal record. Actually it would be so much better for them if it were a criminal process--it would shift the burden to the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they weren't American citizens.
Not so fast Fuji. Anyone who enters the United States illegally (8 U.S.C. § 1325) has committed a misdemeanor offense and can be imprisoned for six months and/or fined. Anyone who after being removed or deported reenters or attempts to reenter the United States (8 U.S.C. § 1326) has committed a felony and can be imprisoned for ten years and fined.
Perhaps part of the problem is that the criminal penalties are rarely used, rather almost always there is a administrative law voluntary removal order. Commonly known in the Immigration Law community as “catch and release.”
If you had a handful of illegal immigrants existing in the margins that argument would make sense. But when it is four percent of your population and there are entire sectors of your economy that rely on the illegal labor, it is more accurate to say that illegal workers are an integral part of America.
You are building a system that looks a lot like apartheid, with a whole class of the American population that has a different set of rights than everybody else, and which is ruthlessly exploited for the benefit of the ruling class. You've used your immigration law to create this discriminatory system as a way of doing an end run around your constitution, which would otherwise forbid it.
These second class workers are denied ordinary rights that would otherwise be constitutionally guaranteed because they are conveniently "illegal" and can be deported if they try and apply for labor law protection, or even just the most basic protection from crime via the justice system.
Fuji, They shouldn't be in the U.S.A. period. Everyone else (NAFTA exceptions) needs to have been granted a visa to work in the U.S.
Their employers disagree. Your economic system disagrees. Your economy depends on them. You say they shouldn't be there, but the actions of your nation say otherwise. Millions upon millions of Americans hire them, millions provide services to them. Hundreds of millions consume the product of their low cost labor. You demand that they be there.
The fact that you are contemplating voter ID laws shows that you are actively developing public policy that assumes their presence in your nation. You are building up the beginnings of an apartheid labor force.
Lets see. There are jobs in the US that even the unemployed don't want to do. There are people in other countries that think having those jobs is better, even with minimal rights, is better than staying at home.
Therefore (as fuji argues) there is a failure of America.
Therefore (as fuji argues) there is a failure of America.
So now you are justifying the national policy of having twelve million oppressed illegal workers who lack the fundamental rights that all other Americans have. You've embraced apartheid. You're trying to justify the unjustifiable.
Why not do it honestly, with work visas, and at least grant them the rights your constitution affords everybody else? Why divide the population into a ruling class with rights and an oppressed class without rights?
This clearly visible attempt to stifle the vote of a certain faction in the US may backfire and rerally mobilize the vote. It's an odd way to claim support and win the vote of the minority in the US.
Speeches like the ones offered up by Jim Clyburn might be really effective;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUsPwCaGBQk&feature=player_embedded
unfortunately not the complete speech though.
or Emanuel Cleaver
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IodyAvuYPVc&feature=player_detailpage
and from a very quiet corner comes one of my favorites. She drives a spike in those religious hypocrites in Republican party.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Yw-m8Hfj4rw
Speeches like the ones offered up by Jim Clyburn might be really effective;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUsPwCaGBQk&feature=player_embedded
unfortunately not the complete speech though.
or Emanuel Cleaver
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IodyAvuYPVc&feature=player_detailpage
and from a very quiet corner comes one of my favorites. She drives a spike in those religious hypocrites in Republican party.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Yw-m8Hfj4rw
“…Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are correct when they say that each individual should be responsible. But their budget goes astray in not acknowledging that we are responsible not only for ourselves and our immediate family — rather — our faith strongly affirms that we are all responsible for one another. I am my sister’s keeper. I am my brother’s keeper.”
EcoLocalizer (http://s.tt/1mKUk)
