Friday, November 17, 2006

Welcome to our side

Something I thought about regarding the WW story on the illegal alien student:

"To work, they use fake Social Security numbers, which they bought nine years ago for about $30 apiece on a street in Woodburn, in a transaction that went something like a drug deal, Carlos' father says."

"As far as the couple knows, they are the only ones with their particular Social Security numbers, which they shared with their current employers in order to get their jobs. Presumably, their employers use those numbers to have taxes withheld from their paychecks..."

Maybe you have heard the phrase "a Republican is just a Democrat who has been mugged." Well, when the IRS knocks on the door of one of you amnesty advocates and insists that you have unreported income you just feel free to join our side over at Oregonians for Immigration Reform.

"An immigration enforcement advocate is just an anmesty proponent who has been victimized by an illegal alien."

24 comments:

Rick Hickey said...

Daniel, very well said.

This story also continues with Dad addmitting that he also has an I.T.I.N., another violation of Federal law and he must have signed an I-9 (employer doesn't know he is illegal), so he has also committed Perjury.

What laws can I pretend don't exist today?

Anonymous said...

I want the open border america haters to watch these videos, go to the previous post and read about how NAFTA has helped Mexico and taken from America and then tell us why we should still allow everybody from Mexico to come here.

BEAR said...

Hey, el gordo smith, your wussihood on oil drilling, border security, amnesty, spending, and your palsy-walsy relationship with wyden has lost you the '08 primary. May I be the first to wish you (and all other rinos) GOOD RIDDANCE.

Bryan Saxton said...

"I want the open border america haters to watch these videos, go to the previous post and read about how NAFTA has helped Mexico and taken from America and then tell us why we should still allow everybody from Mexico to come here."

We're the reason why they are all here.

Anonymous said...

I liked the link and it's passage to the articles I was able to read through the organization site. Ideas are explored which are eloquent in describng diferent policy reasons for an strong stand on immigration.

Good policy drives winning politics.

There are many substantive reasons why illegal immigration is wrong for America.

Thanks for the link.

Anonymous said...

Hey, Brian Saxton, did you take the time to go to the link and look at the articles?

Wages of low income Americans are reduced by illegal immigration.

The environment is damaged by unsustainable immigration levels.

Democrats travel at their peril on the road to open borders.

Not to mention betray subposed Democratic core principles.

Wake up to the dogma your open borders companions feed you.

Bryan Saxton said...

"Hey, Brian Saxton, did you take the time to go to the link and look at the articles?

Wages of low income Americans are reduced by illegal immigration."

No. This, my friend, is a case of causation vs correlation. Just because there is an influx of illegal immigrants in the country does not mean that the decline in wages is due to illegal immigrants. Wage decrease is mainly due to unemployed Americans (who will not take low skilled positions because the jobs they were displaced from are at an entirely different sector of the work force... the example of steel mines comes to mind).

Want more proof? Check out "Beyond Smoke and Mirrors (it's on OFIR's reading list). I bet it will change

"Wake up to the dogma your open borders companions feed you."

Seriously, did you just write that? Am I the only one here who has a problem with the manner in which that sentence was constructed? I'm telling you, Anon 12:52, a community college writing class would be of benefit to you.

Anonymous said...

To Brian Saxton:
So you refuse to read the article,
closing your eyes to an opposing argument. That tells me you are controlled by dogma. You do not want to cause yourself cognitive dissonance.

You have no interest reading an article which could make you reconsider your position. I pity you in your makebelieve world.

I also find it interesting you have no response in regards to the environment. Could it be that even you realize that more people cause more environmental degragation.

I'm glad you can be so dismissive to the economic laws of supply and demand. Of course, you ignore all the jobs Americans will do: construction, truck driver, meat packer, or any number of jobs. Brian did you know there is not one job catagory in America with a majority of illegal aliens, not even agriculture.

It's ironic you mention a book on OFIR's website which you believe affirms you position and you snidely expect it will be removed; frankly, that's you projecting what you would do if a book was on "your" website which contradicts your belief(dogma). Remove the offending book, article, or magazine.

Finally, you need to wakeup and realize your beliefs are not based on reality, but on a dogma of open borders held so tightly you refuse to even look at evidence to the contrary.

When you growup come back and talk to me.

Scottiebill said...

Bryon Saxton: And who pushed the NAFTA thing through? BJ Clinton!

Anonymous said...

bryan saxton said : "Wake up to the dogma your open borders companions feed you."

Seriously, did you just write that? Am I the only one here who has a problem with the manner in which that sentence was constructed?"

bryan, could you spell that out, how should that sentence be constructed?

MAX Redline said...

the example of steel mines comes to mind

We have steel mines?

Seriously, did you just write that? Am I the only one here who has a problem with the manner in which that sentence was constructed? I'm telling you, Anon 12:52, a community college writing class would be of benefit to you.

Pot, meet Kettle.

Crackpot said...

While were on the subject, get a load of this related thread over at BlueOregon:

www.blueoregon.com/2006/11/should_the_door.html

Anonymous said...

"the example of steel mines comes to mind"

Steel is not mined, you twit.

BEAR said...

and wages are not depressed when people won't accept them.

Bryan Saxton said...

If my misprint of steelmines (I apologize, it should be steel factories) is all you have on me, you guys have nothing.

Anonymous said...

bryon, "all you have on me".
You can't look at opposing articles and you can't answer opposing views.

I'd say your a worthless zombie of far-left ideology.

Who when called on it, scampers off like someone after they publically urinate.

Bryan Saxton said...

You want a response, anon?

You accuse me of refusing to read the opposing arguments when you refuse to do the same. Your argument (if you can even call it that!) holds no substance when you are guilty of what you accuse others of doing. As far as not being well read on the subject, here are some sources I've read (and reccomend you read as well):

Simon, Julian L. The Economic Consequences of Immigration. Cambridge: Basil Blackwell Ltd, 1989.

Briggs, Vernon M., Jr., and Stephen Moore. Still and Open Door? Lanham: American University Press, 1994.

Chishti, Muzaffar. "Guest Workers in the House of Labor." New Labor Forum 13.2 (June 2004): 67-75.

Ricca, Stephanie. "Doing the Jobs Americans Won’t." Landscape Management Aug. 2006: 33-34.

I have 30 more when you're done with those.

"It's ironic you mention a book on OFIR's website which you believe affirms you position and you snidely expect it will be removed; frankly, that's you projecting what you would do if a book was on "your" website which contradicts your belief(dogma). Remove the offending book, article, or magazine."

Never once did I make this claim. My only assertion is that nobody has read, or at least has discussed, the viewpoints exercized in that book which contradict (with more than substantial evidence) the claims made by OFIR. The only thing that the book and OFIR agree with is that a guest worker program is a bad idea, after which they split radically on different solutions (Massey's assertions are based on fact).

"The environment is damaged by unsustainable immigration levels."

I find it ironic that someone like you is blaming environmental detrimation on illegal immigration when you fail to address and propose solutions to the root probems associated with it (reliance on fossil fuels, for example). However, I seem to not be able to find the specific article. Post it for me here and I'll look at it. Regardless, I think that is the only thing you had against me.

If you want to talk about being controled by ideology, how about the constant propoganda your right wing friends at OFIR push on you, backed by studies bombarded with fallacys and uncreditable authors?

Seriously, if you're going to call me out, at least learn how to write. Perhaps after that, you can learn how to construct an argument. Then, just maybe, you'll learn how to use the word "dogma" in a manner that doesn't make you look like a complete idiot. Anyway, before you learn how to do any of the aformentioned, try not to make stupid analogys (I couldn't even tell what you meant by that whole "zombie pissing" thing).

Anonymous said...

Saxton, you are a stupid jerk. Is that clear enough. You response gives you away. Obviously, you get the point and know exactly what I said and it stung you like a hornet. Otherwise you wouldn't come out of you little hole.

Don't like the word dogma applied to your beliefs? Get used to it because you evince your dogma everytime you leave a comment on this blog.

Bryan Saxton said...

Hahaha. No, it's just that you sound like someone who discovered the word for the first time when you use it. It's entertaining, really. I like it. Keep using it for my amusement.

As far as "stupid jerks" go, you, my friend, epitomize this perfectly. You have nothing left to counter me with, so you can stop now.

Actually, I take that back. Keep going. It's kind of fun trying to guess what substanceless pile of crap you will attempt to spew out next. Oh yeah, about those writing classes...

"Is that clear enough."

I'll let you figure that one out.

Anonymous said...

Bryan, It's too bad you don't answer arguments. What you are good at is blowing smoke and distracting readers from your inability to answer. You attack my writing, and when challenged to back up your criticism, what else, but no answer.

When challenged about the original post, you spew something about "steel mines" which had nothing to do with the original post.

You use the left's tried and true method...when you can't answer, make a personal attack, and readers will forget you never answered the question.

Your book list is nice, but quite useless. It shows nothing in this argument because the point here was to read a short article and either refute it or support it. You could do neither.

"We're the reason they are all here."

This was your first comment on this post. Talk about worthless. Nothing but a troll statement. I hope you are able to do better than that in the future.

Bryan, the amount of space you devote to distracting personal attacks(Bogus grammar attacks, because you have nothing else.) does tell me you are lacking in ability to respond to legitimate arguments.

That must be the most frustrating aspect of your trolling.

Bryan Saxton said...

Bogus grammar attacks? I think they're all relevant.

"We're the reason they are all here."

Sorry. I thought that I had made this clear in earlier posts, but I guess you missed that. NAFTA causes an influx of illegal immigrants into the country.

My example of steel factories was meant to point out that the types of workers displaced through unemployment were of a different work sector than those supposedly displaced by illegal immigrants (the book I made reference to by Simon earlier illustrates this point).

Ironically, you are guilty of the very accusations you make against me. You claim that I refuse to read a short article (which is likely a biased "news" report) on illegal immigration and environmental degradation and I responded that I could not find the article and asked that you link me to it, which you have yet to do. I beleive I've responded to every other pathetic excuse for a counter argument you've provided. I've provided you with four sources that contradict the claims you make, yet you refuse to look at them.

"It shows nothing in this argument because the point here was to read a short article and either refute it or support it."

No. You've attempted to declare yourself the arbiter of this argument, who likely will continue to skewer the objectives to fit your means. I've been able to refute any argument you've provided me with except for the one concerning the environment (which, again, I cannot find).

Keep posting. I need a good laugh every now and again.

rickyragg said...

"You've attempted to declare yourself the arbiter of this argument, who likely will continue to skewer the objectives to fit your means."

Skewer?

The only "skewering" occurring around here is that which you continually inflict on yourself.

Did you mean "skew"?

If so, your sentence would move from the category of nonsensical to merely awkward and obtuse - your usual style.

As for your purported open-mindedness, your statement "You claim that I refuse to read a short article (which is likely a biased "news" report..." (emphasis mine), betrays your prejudices and hypocrisy ever so succinctly.

Have a nice day.

Anonymous said...

Bryan, at this point the post is stale, although I will point out the articles were on the OFIR website(through its own linking mechanism) which was linked in the original post. I don't have the skill to post the environmnent article, but it was right on the OFIR site through a link.

Time to move on, happy trails.

Brian said...

When I was looking for dual diagnosis facility I didn’t know where to turn. I finally went with this center and they helped me save my life.