Not to jump in too quick, however, to your last poat.

Right now W is looking for any support he can get and the RNC, which shut down its small donor marketing program, is also. I’ll make you a deal, send me some money and I will send thank you cards, certificates, electronically signed letters, pictures, or whatever you want. Of course, I will also tell you how badly I need your next contribution.

On to some of the facts – over fifty percent of the state general budget is for education, with much more than 30% of that for illegals, so my posting that we are paying large dollars for education was correct. In addition, it is a fact that the majority of the illegals have a large number of school age children – much more than the number for citizens, live in housing with much lower tax liabilities, have multiple families living in that one low value home, and therefore, they disproportionately use the service compared to the contributions even if you wrongly just look at real estate taxes.

ELL is not only pricey, but the statistics are that the Native American and Black school children have lower reading scores that the Hispanic school children. Therefore, we are taking funding and school time from the children of American citizens in order to give extra time and attention to illegals.

As for the Health care situation, why mandate it only for the foreign nationals, why not mandate it for all employers for all employees. To do otherwise would discriminate against American workers.

We already require consultation with a health professional for every other type of surgery. The abortion was the only exception for years and years. Also, are you aware that a school nurse could refer a twelve year old to Planned Parenthood for a “procedure” without the parents knowledge. Yet that same school nurse could not give an aspirin to a child with migraines with the parent knowledge and doctor’s prescription.

You may have a problem with the term “anchor baby”, but it is the term most commonly used across the board to describe a situation where a person is brougnt past medical facilities to get just across the border so the baby will be an anchor for the mother etc to come here.

Horst, the bottom line is that you agree much more with kral who is self identified as supporting our opponents than you agree with the mainstream of the Republican Party. That is not a surprise, not a judgment, not an ad hominem attack, just a fact. Think about that.

Just so I do not make you think I am picking on you, as you asserted previously, I will stop trying to show you areas where there may be more information than you are aware of or are using to present your case. It has been interesting.

PS: Let me know if you want to send some money so I can send you some thank you cards and letters.

I do agree that for thousands of years people have used the church and its congregations for less than pious purposes. Clearly, hypocrites should be identified. Many wear their faith on their sleeves as a fashion accessory, even within our own party right here in Arizona. It is all about networking and vote gathering. My point is that guys like Mac and Jerry have done a world of good in this community and should not have their faith called out into question. I’m not suggesting that you have said so, but others have insinuated it. That is the reach.

Isn’t that exactly what this bill is doing? Mandating the parameters of who an employer can employ? Aren’t you now arguing against your own statements?

I would support an employer sanctions bill, but not this one for the reasons laid out above. I personally think that a “fines” type sanction is much more effective, because it is not as drastic, not as cumbersome, and works into the market, instead of taking the business OUT of the market.

That is interesting about the OBGYN down south, I had not heard that there were none south of Tucson.

Are you insulted because you were identified as European or because you were identified as having socialistic tendencies in this matter? I didn’t think you thought you would believe being European was an adhominem attack. I thought you were proud of your heritage.

You are in favor of a law that mandates government parameters of individual employer agreements with their employees. That sounds like socialism and therefore is not an ad hominem attack just a statement of fact.

Being in New York City when the Platform was passed, but probably not when it was drafted, is fine but does that mean anything as far as your support of it? It seems I have read other places of your disregard of major parts of it and therefore you would not be called a Platform conservative.

One of the historical highlights of our country is that the market conditions determine the employer/employee relationship. Some people work for certain employers, ie; government, for less money than they might make in private enterprise in order to have the benefits of insurance and perceived stability. Others want to make more money and do not feel they need the benefit package that the government provides.

Therein lies free choice in a free enterprise system. For the govennment to mandate those parameters is socialism – more accurately fascism which I believe you are also knowledgeable about. Just in case someone else might misunderstand, a definition of fascism is “A philosophy or system of government that is marked by stringent social and economic control.” Like mandated health care provisions.

As to your statement re: the Hispanic mother needing medical care, all conservative, or as you state, loving Christian religious right person (speaking of ad hominem), believe she should have proper medical care. However we do not believe her relatives should risk her life and the life of the baby to bypass medical facilities in Mexico to violate our sovereignty so the baby will be an anchor baby.

Those actions have created the current mess where there are no OB GYN doctors south of Tucson available to serve the Americans who need those services and has resulted in the closing of emergency services and hospitals in that area.

It is apparent that with the population growth in Mexico – not even counting the illegal exodus of the invaders to the US – that there are adequate medical facilities to safely deliver children in Mexico and it should not be the responsibility of the American taxpayer to subsidize the medical costs of a foreign nation.

But here is the rest, and maybe the most relevant to some of this discussion… “It is its natural manure.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/05/AR2007070501386.html

RvW allows abortion – which I strongly disagree with – but but does not mandate it. where the rule of law comes in, I also do not believe in bombing abortion clinics that shed more blood. To go back to my post, work to change the law if you disagree with it, which I do with RvW.

If the government grants amnesty, it is the law and I will follow it, while working to change it. These employers willfully violated the law and want to be held blameless and considered righteous while continuing to violate it.

It was called the Reagan Revolution – also bloodless, but I was referring to the Jefferson quote whereby, I believe, either word can be used.

nightcrawler,

I support a guest worker program where needed. We currently have a guest worker program, but those people are not here illegally. I don’t know who is pontificating more on this issue, but I do know that our system only works when everyone plays within the framework of laws that are passed or not passed with the will of the people.

See comment 11 above about TJ. Maybe a more authoritative source:

http://www.quotedb.com/quotes/2074

I actually thought it was called the “Reagan Revolution” not the “Regan Rebellion.”

I agree with you GOP PK, I just don’t know which direction that necessarily leads. If the government grants amnesty as the law… If the government ‘opens the borders’ (which I am not advocating for FYI), then that is the law. How do you decide which laws you are going to be for and against? I don’t know that it is as straight forward as you are saying.

I would have to say that 99% is WAY overstated, but that’s because I believe that abortion is murder (which I believe you do as well). The law is you can abort your unborn child… hm, probably not a symmetrical argument, but you get the point .

Neither Thomas Jefferson nor I advocated the shedding of blood. If you read my post, I stated rebellion and that the last rebellion of the people was the elction of Ronald Reagan. The last I checked that was done without bloodshed.

The problem is that the current system has caused thousands of people to shed their blood to get here, and thousands more shed their blood by the criminal activities of those who have violated our sovereignty and rule of law by coming here illegally.

To reduce the shedding of blood, follow the law. It will work 99% of the time and those two are not in conflict with each other.

What’s with the Ad Hom? Why does it matter what perspective someone comes from, do you not believe that truth exists outside of individual people’s worldviews? I don’t think it matters what perspective someone comes from, they have the ability to be right just as often as you do (and probably much more so than I!).

This seems to me to be such a difficult and sensitive issue that both sides need to come together and work towards a solution, but instead we just attack each other. I think the hardest thing for me is I wonder what I would have done if I would have been many of these illegal immigrants, and frankly, I would have done the same thing they did. Maybe you think that is immoral of me, I guess. I do have to wonder though about the whole “let’s shed blood thing, quote Thomas Jefferson” attitude that so many Republicans on this site are quoting (see above!), and then turn around and say “follow the law!” Um, which is it?