[The Godfather]

Don't drink alcohol, much less Corona.
Don't go out to party.
Eat only food frozen and shipped from Asia.
Avoid standing under any roof built by an illegal Mexican.

[Dark Helmet]

What he said.

[iLikebeer]

Originally Posted by The Godfather

Don't drink alcohol, much less Corona.
Don't go out to party.
Eat only food frozen and shipped from Asia.
Avoid standing under any roof built by an illegal Mexican.

So to spite Mexicans you want to sabotage mostly American owned businesses?
Just call it the 5th of May and go out to American owned businesses while waving mini USA flags if you want to do something.
Also, Corona is nasty anyway. Just order a non-south of the border drink.

[subego]

Originally Posted by iLikebeer

Also, Corona is nasty anyway. Just order a non-south of the border drink.

Never saw what people saw in Corona.

Now, Dos Equis ain't a bad little beer (as mass produced stuff goes).

[Ratm]

Originally Posted by iLikebeer

So to spite Mexicans you want to sabotage mostly American owned businesses?
Just call it the 5th of May and go out to American owned businesses while waving mini USA flags if you want to do something.
Also, Corona is nasty anyway. Just order a non-south of the border drink.

You probably don't like Corona because your taste buds are so accustom to that nasty piss water known as budweiser.

[Brien]

Aye. Go to Canada and get some real beer.

[iLikebeer]

Originally Posted by Ratm

You probably don't like Corona because your taste buds are so accustom to that nasty piss water known as budweiser.

Like there's a difference between Corona and Budweiser. It's all crap. I'm addicted to Guinness! and my local microbrewery's amber. I'll only drink budweiser at sporting events...or if it's free and we're concentrating on getting wasted.

You probably like ratm because it used to be trendy. Wait, I just pulled a stupid statement out of nowhere, too! This is a fun game! Unfounded assumptions are great.

[wallinbl]

I can't really tell if you're serious about this or not?

I guess I don't really understand the whole immigration law and all that. We were born in a wealthy country, so we're going to set up walls and make damn sure we don't let too many others share in our good fortune? Seems kind of dickish, doesn't it? Too bad for you that you were born in a poor country! Bad break, huh? Maybe if you believe in reincarnation you'll get lucky next time!

[FireWire]

Originally Posted by The Godfather

Don't drink alcohol, much less Corona.
Don't go out to party.
Eat only food frozen and shipped from Asia.
Avoid standing under any roof built by an illegal Mexican.

But.. if I buy a sub, can I put some "mayo" in it?

(OK, it's a bad one )

Back on topic, don't you find it ironic that American want to boycott Mexican products on 5/5, after YOU took their side during the war?

Cinco de Mayo - Wikipedia

In 1861, in response to Mexico's refusal to pay off its debt, Britain, Spain and France sent troops to Mexico; they arrived in January of 1862. The democratically-elected new government of President Benito Juárez made agreements with the British and the Spanish, who promptly recalled their armies, but the French stayed, thus beginning the period of the French intervention in Mexico. Emperor Napoleon III wanted to secure French dominance in the former Spanish colony, including installing one of his relatives, Archduke Maximilian of Austria, as ruler of Mexico.

Confident of a quick victory, 6,500 French soldiers marched on to Mexico City to seize the capital before the Mexicans could muster a viable defense. Along their march, the French already encountered stiff resistance before Zaragoza struck out to intercept the invaders.
The battle between the French and Mexican armies occurred on May 5 when Zaragoza's ill-equipped militia of 4,500 men encountered the better armed French force. However, Zaragoza's small and nimble cavalry units were able to prevent French dragoons from taking the field and overwhelming the Mexican infantry. With the dragoons removed from the main attack, the Mexicans routed the remaining French soldiers with a combination of their tenacity, inhospitable terrain, and a stampede of cattle set off by local peasants. The invasion was stopped and crushed.

Zaragoza won the battle but lost the war. The French Emperor, upon learning of the failed invasion, immediately dispatched another force, this time numbering 30,000 soldiers. By 1864, they succeeded in defeating the Mexican army and occupying Mexico City. Archduke Maximillian became Emperor of Mexico.

Maximilian's rule was short-lived. Mexican rebels opposed to his rule resisted, seeking the aid of the United States. Once the American Civil War was over, the U.S. military began supplying Mexicans with weapons and ammunition, and by 1867, the rebels finally defeated the French and deposed their puppet Emperor. The Mexican people then reelected Juárez as president.

But, eh, it's not the first nor the last time the US did this

[Dakar]

I can't. I'm fueled by alcohol.

[memento]

Originally Posted by wallinbl

I can't really tell if you're serious about this or not?

I guess I don't really understand the whole immigration law and all that. We were born in a wealthy country, so we're going to set up walls and make damn sure we don't let too many others share in our good fortune? Seems kind of dickish, doesn't it? Too bad for you that you were born in a poor country! Bad break, huh? Maybe if you believe in reincarnation you'll get lucky next time!

The issue is that they are here illegally. Not that they immigrated here. Legal immigrants are fine and welcome. All the illegals need to do is get legal and they can stay without issue. Otherwise they do not contribute. Businesses that hire illegals do so to avoid paying taxes, as do the illegals themselves. Yet they can still suck food stamps, unemployment, and other perks from our system. In the numbers that we are talking about, this is not an insignificant drain. We were founded on immigrants. They are and will always be welcome.

It has nothing to do with being "rich" and everything to do with following the laws. How strict are they in Mexico with non-mexicans? MUCH more strict than we are.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by wallinbl

I guess I don't really understand the whole immigration law and all that. We were born in a wealthy country, so we're going to set up walls and make damn sure we don't let too many others share in our good fortune? Seems kind of dickish, doesn't it?

Nobody here is arguing that the borders should be entirely closed. There are some who do argue this -consider Pat Buchanan, who once advocated stopping all immigration, legal and illegal, for a period of five years- but they're not taking part in this particular argument. It does no good to either side when extremism is projected onto moderates.

The US is, indeed, a nation of immigrants on some level. This is a large part of what has made the nation so strong. Very few people, and no one on these forums, would ever even dream of arguing against that. However, no nation, not even the US, has ever been able to sustain a completely open-borders policy. No matter how open a nation is, there needs to be some kind of order and control in the immigration process. As far as this goes, the US has one of the most liberal immigration policies in the world.

The problem with illegal immigrants right now is that they bypass that control, and they do so in such a way that nobody benefits. Usually, the immigrants themselves do not benefit from it, because they wind up having to work for those who ruthlessly exploit their illegal status for their own personal gain. Society at large gains little if any real benefit, because the immigrants draw from taxpayer-funded programs and nobody -neither the immigrant nor the employer- is held accountable to pay anything back for that extra draw. The only ones who really benefit are criminal employers who use the loophole to put the workers through what are essentially slave conditions.

The real question here is how to close the loophole. If immigrants would resort to legal channels, then the issue would cease to exist. I can see the allure in building a fence, but the concept needs a little work. If a fence must be built, I would implement it thus: build the fence, but rather than shooting illegal crossers on sight, send them back with forms and literature detailing the legal immigration process. Such forms and literature already exist, and they're already translated into many languages, so the only extra effort involved here (aside from building the fence, of course) is to set up places where they can be obtained easily.

Does a fence need to be built? I don't think so. I think there are other ways of solving the problem. But I do think that any real solution is going to need to be built around getting people who would otherwise cross illegally to instead cross legally.

[Stradlater]

You DO realize that Americans probably celebrate Cinco de Mayo more than Mexicans do, right? The 5th of May is hardly a holiday in Mexico. Americans love a drunken celebration.

[Stradlater]

Originally Posted by iLikebeer

Like there's a difference between Corona and Budweiser. It's all crap. I'm addicted to Guinness! and my local microbrewery's amber. I'll only drink budweiser at sporting events...or if it's free and we're concentrating on getting wasted.

Stateside Guinness is a step up from Corona, sure, and a couple more from Bud, but it's still nothing great. Have you ever had the real imported stuff?

Corona is not great, but add a lime and it's like a soda, so why not?

[wallinbl]

Originally Posted by memento

The issue is that they are here illegally. Not that they immigrated here. Legal immigrants are fine and welcome.

All 12 that we allow each year?

All the illegals need to do is get legal and they can stay without issue. Otherwise they do not contribute.

Good luck with that. It's incredibly hard to do. I've worked with people that were trying to obtain citizenship. It's a ludicrous process that takes 10-15 years and hoards of money. We're doing a fine job of basically saying that we only want the people with really good skills and jobs.

Businesses that hire illegals do so to avoid paying taxes, as do the illegals themselves. Yet they can still suck food stamps, unemployment, and other perks from our system. In the numbers that we are talking about, this is not an insignificant drain.

A drain on what? We can't afford to help people that need it? I know, I know, we're not in the business of handing out charity. Why do you think they risk so much to come across the border and work for so little? Because it sucks that bad where they came from.

We were founded on immigrants. They are and will always be welcome.

That's a borderline dishonest statement. We say they are welcome but we make it so hard that you have to be doing pretty well to get here in the first place.

It has nothing to do with being "rich" and everything to do with following the laws.

Like most laws, immigration laws are easier to follow if you're rich. If you're a poor Mexican who's only (current) skill is cutting grass, you're not likely to be let in. Nevermind the fact that you can't get an education where you came from, we'll just send you back and tell you to get one first.

[wallinbl]

Originally Posted by Millennium

However, no nation, not even the US, has ever been able to sustain a completely open-borders policy. No matter how open a nation is, there needs to be some kind of order and control in the immigration process. As far as this goes, the US has one of the most liberal immigration policies in the world.

The reason that we feel the need to control the borders is because so many people are living in such comparatively lousy situations that they'll do damn near anything to get here. That's the actual problem, not how many we let in or how we control them coming in. If there wasn't such an enormous disparity in living conditions, all countries could have an open border policy. No one seems interested in solving that problem, though.

[RAILhead]

I'll be honest.

I'm in South Texas and I've lived in Texas all my life. In a nutshell, we're all just getting tired of the Mexicans. There are too many of them. Just flat-out too dadgum many Mexicans. They're everywhere.

[memento]

Originally Posted by wallinbl

All 12 that we allow each year?

Good luck with that. It's incredibly hard to do. I've worked with people that were trying to obtain citizenship. It's a ludicrous process that takes 10-15 years and hoards of money. We're doing a fine job of basically saying that we only want the people with really good skills and jobs.


A drain on what? We can't afford to help people that need it? I know, I know, we're not in the business of handing out charity. Why do you think they risk so much to come across the border and work for so little? Because it sucks that bad where they came from.

That's a borderline dishonest statement. We say they are welcome but we make it so hard that you have to be doing pretty well to get here in the first place.


Like most laws, immigration laws are easier to follow if you're rich. If you're a poor Mexican who's only (current) skill is cutting grass, you're not likely to be let in. Nevermind the fact that you can't get an education where you came from, we'll just send you back and tell you to get one first.

Interesting perception you have. First, get some immigration numbers in your head so that you have a clue what we're talking about. Second, it's not that hard to work here legally with a green card. That would make you legal. Define "hoards of money"? I know mexicans who were here with a green card and are now citizens. They were not "rich" and still are not "rich". They ARE hard working and make a comfortable living. They are happy and in fact don't like all these rallys and protests. They think it's stupid. And this is coming from mexican immigrants that I know.

Just because it sucks where you are, doesn't mean that you can come here and break the law.

What's dishonest? That we were founded on immigrants? Or that we welcome legal immigrants? I don't get it.

A mexican who cuts crass or works cleaning up after horses can still, very easily, get a green card and be legal. What does having an education have anything to do with this? Get a GED with a green card. We're not sending them back if they're here legally. yeesh.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by wallinbl

All 12 that we allow each year?

No economy can absorb an infinite number of immigrants in a single year. I'm not trying to suggest that there's an infinite number of people trying to get in -clearly there isn't- but there is an upper limit to what any nation, even the US, can handle.

A drain on what? We can't afford to help people that need it? I know, I know, we're not in the business of handing out charity. Why do you think they risk so much to come across the border and work for so little? Because it sucks that bad where they came from.

Nobody is saying otherwise. But your explanation is only that: an explanation. It isn't a justification. Of course things are bad where most of these people came from. Does that give them the right to drain from a different society, bringing it that small bit closer to the conditions in where they came from?

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by wallinbl

The reason that we feel the need to control the borders is because so many people are living in such comparatively lousy situations that they'll do damn near anything to get here.

'Damn near anything' doesn't seem to include legal means, does it?

That's the actual problem, not how many we let in or how we control them coming in.

Perhaps, but that's getting beyond the scope of the US government to be able or qualified to do much (if anything) about.

If there wasn't such an enormous disparity in living conditions, all countries could have an open border policy. No one seems interested in solving that problem, though.

If that is a problem, then it is a societal/cultural problem, not a legal one. Law is a good tool for many things, but a hammer doesn't work well for driving screws. If this problem is to be solved, then it shouldn't be solved through law.

[wallinbl]

Originally Posted by memento

Just because it sucks where you are, doesn't mean that you can come here and break the law.

Get yourself into a situation like that and your opinion might change. You'll do whatever it takes to get out of it and provide more for your family. If that means hiding in the cracks in America because you didn't make the green card list, then so be it.

What's dishonest? That we were founded on immigrants? Or that we welcome legal immigrants? I don't get it.

A mexican who cuts crass or works cleaning up after horses can still, very easily, get a green card and be legal. What does having an education have anything to do with this? Get a GED with a green card. We're not sending them back if they're here legally. yeesh.

We only say that we welcome immigrants. The reality is that far more people want to get here than are legally allowed in under the annual maximums. Given the disparity in numbers, we get to be a bit choosy about who we allow. This means that the poorer your situation, the more disadvantaged you are in getting here legally.


My real problem is that we look at the "immigration problem" and not at the "too many people live in really crappy conditions" problem. In our minds, Americans are more important and more worthy of help than others. I don't blame the illegal immigrants one bit and I think we have a moral obligation to help them. Instead, we argue about how to keep them in their misery and out of our hair.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by wallinbl

We only say that we welcome immigrants. The reality is that far more people want to get here than are legally allowed in under the annual maximums.

It's nobody's fault that more people want to get in than we can handle. Not the aspiring immigrants', but not ours either. Would you rather we cease to become so desirable? That can be arranged in many different ways, including economic collapse due to a system overburdened by people who withdraw but do not pay back.

My real problem is that we look at the "immigration problem" and not at the "too many people live in really crappy conditions" problem. In our minds, Americans are more important and more worthy of help than others.

A government's first duty is to its people, is it not? In our own government's mind, yes; Americans deserve more help from it than non-Americans do. This is as it should be. It should be similar for other nations' governments, concerning their own people.

I don't blame the illegal immigrants one bit and I think we have a moral obligation to help them.

How? By tearing down their existing governments and setting up systems whereby they, too, can excel? This strategy isn't exactly popular at the moment.

[Spliffdaddy]

"I don't blame the illegal immigrants one bit and I think we have a moral obligation to help them."

So you're saying we should overthrow the Mexican government?

I'm game.

[whgoodman]

Originally Posted by wallinbl

If there wasn't such an enormous disparity in living conditions, all countries could have an open border policy. No one seems interested in solving that problem, though.

You and Karl Marx share the same ideology, except the implementations of Marxism and Socialism seem to have failed miserably. There will always be the haves and have nots. If everyone is a have then basic human greed and assertiveness will take over because someone else wants to have more than the rest creating a have not. You have enough have nots with very few haves and with a little shaking and baking you have a revolution [either by vote or by taking up arms] and it all starts over. Very simplistic, but history doesn't lie. Normally, however, the revolution takes place at the hands of the citizenry and not a population of illegal immigrants.

[maxx9photo]

I always put Mayo on my sandwich so No way!!!

[porieux]

...