Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has accused fellow GOP presidential contender Rudolph Giuliani of operating a “sanctuary city” while New York mayor. Presumably, Giuliani waved illegal aliens into Gotham, like a third-base coach urging runners home ahead of a mighty outfielder’s throw. In fact, Giuliani was tougher on illegal immigrants than Romney claims. Conversely, Romney was easier on illegals than his current hard-line posture suggests.
In last month’s CNN/YouTube debate, Romney quoted Giuliani:
“If you come here, and you work hard, and you happen to be in an undocumented status, you’re one of the people that we want in this city.” Romney conveniently omitted this sentence from Giuliani’s June 1994 press-conference remarks:
“And if you’re somebody who comes here, and you want to violate the drug laws, the laws against violence, the laws to protect us in other ways, then I’d like to see you apprehended and put in prison and then sent back to where you came from.”
Among New York’s 400,000 illegals, the feds deported 776 in 1994. With the Clinton administration spurning expulsions, Giuliani did the best he could.
Giuliani maintained city policies that let illegal aliens report crimes without risking ejection. With 1,946 homicides and 600,346 serious crimes the year he was elected, Giuliani wanted illegals to identify criminals. They similarly could receive emergency medicine, rather than remain untreated, possibly sickening others. Illegals also could send their children to public schools, rather than have 70,000 kids roaming the streets, attracting criminals, and possibly committing violations themselves.
Giuliani’s anti-crime campaign otherwise targeted illegal-alien offenders.
“We’d like to see a situation in which we can put ‘em on a plane and charge INS for the ticket,” Katie Lapp, Giuliani’s criminal-justice coordinator, told Newsday in November 1994. “It’s the mayor’s position that INS should increase border patrols and keep these people out of the country in the first place.”
The INS never approved what Newsday dubbed “Air Giuliani.” In April 1994, however, Giuliani restored alerts to the INS whenever police arrested illegal-alien criminal suspects. In January 1993, the INS claimed it lacked resources to pursue such reports and asked Democratic Mayor David Dinkins to stop making them.
In contrast, Romney waited until 18 days before leaving office to secure federal permission for state troopers to arrest illegal aliens. Actually, this program never commenced. As promised, Romney’s Democratic successor, Gov. Deval Patrick, scrapped it before troopers began relevant training.
Romney’s immigration record was ho-hum long before this 11th-hour initiative. Beyond opposing driver’s licenses and in-state college tuition for illegals, Romney’s failures helped keep Massachusetts attractive to them.
It may be a private matter that illegal aliens raked Romney’s lawn as recently as Nov. 29. But Romney’s administration should have scrutinized state employees more carefully. Among nine Massachusetts public-works sites examined in the June 18, 2006, Boston Globe, 38 percent of weekly wage-earners lacked valid Social Security numbers. At one university masonry project, 55 of the contractor’s 87 workers had dodgy Social Security numbers. Some belonged to dead people. One jail-construction worker offered this unusual Social Security number: 666-66-6666.
“The governor is not surprised that our current immigration laws are a mess,” Romney’s gubernatorial spokesman, Eric Fehrnstrom, shrugged.
Meanwhile, Romney let Brewster, Brookline, Cambridge, Lexington, Orleans, and Somerville openly flout federal immigration laws.
“I’m not going to break the trust we have built up with the immigrant community to enforce the misguided policies of the federal government,” Somerville Mayor Joseph Curtatone said in the July 6 Somerville News.
Romney could have pressured or sued these six sanctuary cities to become non-sanctuaries. He also could have slashed their allowances. Instead, state tax dollars cascaded into their coffers.
Romney’s proposed assistance to these locales grew from $103,218,421 in fiscal year 2004 to $107,419,246 in fiscal year 2007 — up 4.1 percent.
Did Romney challenge these sanctuary cities?
“Absolutely not,” Cambridge mayoral spokesman John Clifford told the American Spectator’s Philip Klein. Clifford laughed: “He never took on Cambridge, except out of state.”
“Romney’s being a hypocrite on this issue,” Curtatone told ABC News. “I did not receive a mandate, any communication, anything at all from him about this. If it’s so important to him, why didn’t he have the state police enforcing it?”
_______________________________________________________________________________________
New York commentator Deroy Murdock is a columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service and a media fellow with the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:29 pm
Good old Deroy, you can always count on him for a smear.
First, Romney never argued that Giuliani went after a relative handful of illegal immigrants committing disorderly crimes. The issue here is that Rudy DID wave illegals into NYC like a 3rd base coach, so long as they were willing to work hard and not shoot anyone.
Think there would be 400,000 illegals in NYC if Rudy wasn’t waving dollar bills in front of their faces?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:31 pm
Regarding the infamous Rudy quote, the anti-Rudys see no need to integrated it with a quarter-century of quotes by Rudy about how the Federal government should enforce the border FIRST. A victim of Fed inaction, Rudy had to deal with the situation best he could to protect his city, and that meant keeping 400,000 illegals free to report crime, keep their kids in school and off the streets where they would be sitting ducks and/or burgeoning criminals.
How do I integrate that infamous quote with Rudy’s 25 years of quotes railing against the Feds not enforcing the border? I believe he said it calm the fears of his illegals and make them comfortable speaking with the authorities without fear, so they could combat crime.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:32 pm
murphy, that’s the number he inherited.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:32 pm
What would YOU do about the kids of those 400,000, Mayor murphy?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:35 pm
Deroy,
Do us all a favor and try to regain some credibility by writing a piece that is not anti-Romney.
Anytime someone reads your name as author they immediately take everything you write with a couple of grains of salt. I can understand supporting your candidate by attacking his main competitor, but you take it to an extreme. From reading your accounts, Romney is the most unqualified, insincere, anti-conservative to ever run for the GOP nomination.
Give Romney some credit once in a while and your opinion and analysis will carry a lot more weight.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:35 pm
Laughable that you call this a smear, when it’s precisely on this issue that RUDY has been most viciously smeared.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:36 pm
Metro,
Don’t start that Crap again.
RUdy set up incentives for illegals. When Rudy starts getting rid of incentives, and making life difficult for illegals they will stop coming. Instead Rudy gave them an open invitation to come to NYC.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:38 pm
Jason, Rudy inherited 400,000 illegals.
He has a 25-year record of railing against the lack of action by the Border Patrol and the INS.
What would you do about the 400,000, if you just inherited them?
How do you reconcile that one quote by Rudy, when there are several dozen of him urging Fed enforcement?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:38 pm
I name facts, and you call it crap?
Despicable.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
AS ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY GENERAL, GIULIANI CALLED FOR STRICTER IMMIGRATION LAWS
Associate Attorney General Giuliani Was Frustrated With Lack of Focus Justice Leadership Had Shown On Immigration Issues. Giuliani: “As you know, for too long those in positions of leadership in the Department have ignored the immigration area — policy, law and budget. Reversing this lack of emphasis and tackling problems long neglected are necessary …� (Associate Attorney General Rudy Giuliani, Letter To Nina Rao Cameron, INS District Counsel, 11/3/81)
In July 1982, Giuliani’s Office Commissioned A Report Of INS Headquarters In Order To Review Productivity And Efficiency Of The Agency. (Renee Szybala, Memo To Associate Attorney General Rudy Giuliani, 7/9/82)
In 1982, Giuliani Argued That The Federal Government Should Focus On Improved Border Security And Potentially Criminal Illegal Immigrants. GIULIANI: “And in a situation where we have enormous ongoing immigration problems, wouldn’t that be a terrible waste of our resources and a diversion from the kinds of things that the President has been doing and the Attorney General has been doing over the last six or seven months that have begun to restore control of our borders.� NEWSCASTER: “Giuliani says the Administration stands behind its policy of deterring those who come to the United States illegally by holding illegals in detention camps, increasing border controls, and implying sanctions against employers who hire illegal aliens.� (Miami’s Channel 10 News, 2/25/82)
Giuliani: “In The Last Decade, Our Policies Intended To Make Immigration Fair And Orderly Have Failed. We Truly Have Lost Control Of Our Borders.� (Associate Attorney General Rudy Giuliani, Remarks To Seventh Annual Baron De Hirsh Meyer Lecture Series, Miami, FL, 4/16/82)
Giuliani Noted It Was Lax Enforcement Of Immigration Laws That Led To An Uncontrolled Border And The Illegal Immigration Crisis. Giuliani: “This country has neglected to enforce our immigration laws. As a result, we have lost control of our borders. This Administration is committed to enforce its laws — firmly and fairly — so that all people who choose to come here, from whatever nation, will do so in accordance with our laws.� (Associate Attorney General Rudy Giuliani, Statement, 6/14/82)
AS MAYOR, GIULIANI WANTED FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO DO MORE ABOUT ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION
Giuliani In 1995: “[T]he Federal Government Should Be Doing More About Illegal Immigration.� (Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Joint Press Conference with Governor Pete Wilson (CA), New York, NY, 3/29/95)
Giuliani Said INS Failed To Deport Most Criminal Illegals, Even Though NYC Officials Gave Them Names. Giuliani: “We just happened to check the numbers and in this part of the state, there were only about 776 deportations last year of people. … Now we send thousands and thousands of names of illegal and undocumented aliens to the INS who have committed crimes. Either accused or convicted of committing crimes. So literally sitting at the INS is a pile maybe this big of names of people who have committed crimes and last year they got around to deporting seven to eight hundred of them. So before there are obligations placed on [city of New York], to turn over the names of children in school or their parents or people who use public hospitals, I’d like to see the Immigration and Naturalization Service dealing with people who commit crimes.� (Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Joint Press Conference With Governor Pete Wilson (CA), New York, NY, 3/29/95)
In 1996, Giuliani Said The Federal Government Should Do More To Combat Illegal Immigrants, With Regard To Border Patrol As Well As Foreign Policy. GIULIANI: “What I say is illegal immigration is wrong. We should do everything we can to cut it out, to stop it. The federal government should do a lot more about it, both with regard to foreign policy, border patrol, things that are done with regard to deportation, in which a lot more resources should be put into it.� (CNN’s “Evans & Novak,� 7/6/96)
Giuliani Said The Federal Government Should Focus More Of Its Resources On Deporting Illegal Drug Dealers. Giuliani: What the federal government could do is to deport more of the illegal drug dealers that we have in our city which … unfortunately, very few deportations take place of the people who are actually selling drugs who are illegal immigrants …� (CBS’ “Face The Nation,� 9/22/96)
Giuliani: “There Is No One That Is In Favor Of Illegal Immigration. I’m Against It. It’s Wrong For People To Violate The Law.� (Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Remarks At The Conference On The New Immigrants, Minneapolis, MN, 9/30/96)
Giuliani Said The Federal Government Does Not Do Enough To Deport Illegal Immigrants. Giuliani: “[T]he reality is, the Federal Government doesn’t deport them. In New York City, which has 400,000 undocumented immigrants, only about 1,500 a year are deported. Under the new legislation, that number would — at most — double to about 3,000 out of 400,000.� (Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Remarks At The Conference On The New Immigrants, Minneapolis, MN, 9/30/96)
Giuliani: “Preventing Illegal Immigration Is The Job Of The Federal Government. The United States Has To Do A Lot Better Job Of Patrolling Our Borders.� Giuliani: “[P]reventing illegal immigration is the job of the Federal Government. The United States has to do a lot better job of patrolling our borders. If we can’t stop illegal immigration, then we can’t stop drugs and weapons from entering the country, either..� (Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Remarks At The Conference On The New Immigrants, Minneapolis, MN, 9/30/96)
Giuliani: “[P]reventing Illegal Immigration Is The Job Of The Federal Government. The United States Has To Do A Lot Better Job Of Patrolling Our Borders.� (Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Remarks At Harvard University’s Kennedy School Of Government, 10/10/96)
In 1997, “At A News Conference, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani Repeatedly Called For A Tightening Of Immigration Policy And Barring Aliens Who Admit They Have Been Accused Of Terrorism.� (Richard Pyle, “Source: FBI Links NYC Ploy To Hamas,� The Associated Press, 8/1/97)
Giuliani Called For INS To Focus More Energy On Deporting Illegals Who Commit Crimes And Endanger Society. Giuliani: “Along these lines, I believe that Congress should also encourage the INS to focus more of its energy and resources on deporting illegal immigrants who commit crimes and endanger the rest of society. New York City spends approximately 36 million dollars to jail illegal immigrants who are criminals. Of the 4,400 illegal immigrants who pass through the jail system only approximately 160 are deported each year. If the federal government is serious about stopping illegal immigration it should work diplomatically with other governments and make our national borders more secure.� (Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Judiciary Committee, U.S. Senate, Testimony, 8/11/97)
ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL, GIULIANI STRESSES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO SECURE BORDERS FIRST
“Giuliani Said The Federal Government Needs To Secure Borders And Address Concerns About Security Before It Can Handle Questions About Immigrants Already In The United States.� (Brad Branan, “Giuliani Taps Into Valley Funds Again GOP Presidential Hopeful Attends Fresno Fundraiser,� The Fresno Bee, 6/29/07)
Giuliani Said Arizona Was Enacting Its Own Immigration Laws As A Result Of The Government’s Failure To Address The Issue. “Asked about a new Arizona law that will require suspension or revocation of business licenses of employers which [knowingly hire] illegal immigrants, Giuliani said it appeared to be a response by the state to the federal government’s failure to address the issue.� (Paul Davenport, “Giuliani: Focus Immigration Efforts On Border Enforcement,� The Associated Press, 7/26/07)
December 6th, 2007 at 7:41 pm
What would I do? Take away any incentive for them staying and not invite more into the city. They only come and stay because they find it hospital. Humans operate on incentives.
As mayor would you invite all the illegals to your city like Rudy did?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:42 pm
We can always count on DeRoy
If I didn’t have to listen and read Hugh Hewitt’s “non-biased opinions” I’d be more sympathetic, but DeRoy does need to calm down.
Actually, DeRoy used to be a huge Thompson fan when he was a Senator, constantly praising him… so I was surprised he turned so quickly in his last article, but it really wasn’t that harsh on him.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:42 pm
Also, Romney didn’t wait until 18 days before leaving office until he deputized state troopers to arrest illegal aliens. This program started over 6 months earlier.
And it’s not a Governor’s job to dictate to local officials how they follow federal laws. That’s up to the feds and the localities. It’s the Governor’s job to make sure localities are following state laws, and to make sure that the state is following federal laws.
As Romney said before, it’s not his job to save mayors from themselves. They know what the federal law is as well as anybody.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:43 pm
Great, So rudy calls for tougher immigation laws all the while asking for the illegals to come to the city and claiming he is the most liberal immigration mayor who’s policies are most like Clinton.
Please, tell me how this all works out?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:43 pm
I’ve asked this question a number of times and have never received an answer. I will grant, for the moment, that Rudy tried to get the Feds to deport the illegals. My question is, specifically, what action did he take to force action by the Feds?
This whole thing goes back to the Line Item Veto discussion. Rudy takes great pride, it seems, in taking the Federal Government to court to overturn an “unconstitutional law” (which at that time was not unconstitutional). Would it not seem that the great Defender of the Constitution would have been equally excited about taking the Federal Government to court to enforce a constitutional law?
Just askin’.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
Jason, thanks for dodging specifics, the actual problem.
“Take away any incentive for them staying.” I take it that Mayor Bonham would then kick the kids of those 400,000 out of school to be on Mayor Bonham’s streets?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
Jason, I posted the answer to that in #2. It’s the only way to reconcile 25 years of pro-enforcement positions with that statement.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:45 pm
Tommy, any word on whether Hugh can get his own “featured archive” too?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:45 pm
Irish, because Rudy performed magic on a number of issues (when pretty much no executives ever do), does not mean magic is possible on ALL issues.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:46 pm
Mayor murphy, I presume you’re with Mayor Bonham and you would kick the kids of those 400,000 out of school to be on Mayor murphy’s streets?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:46 pm
Metro,
It’s hilarious to hear you accuse people of dodging, when you won’t admit that Rudy was basically offering to drive everyone without a workers permit or SS card down to the temp agency himself.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:47 pm
You betcha. I would also deny them health care, welfare services, and impose hard enforcement on those who hire illegals. I would deport any illegal who was caught, and not rerelease them. At the same time I would make legal immigration easier for those who have no criminal past.
You know, make it so crime doesn’t pay, but following the laws do.
And what do you know, soon illegals would find it’s easier to live above ground in Mexico than below ground in the US.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
Metro, I’m not asking what did he succeed in doing, I’m simply asking what he did. Over and above speechifying.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
murphy, I think it was a poor choice of words. I think he was trying to make them comfortable with speaking to the authorities.
How do YOU reconcile that ONE quote with 25 years of his quotes URGING FED ACTION? Honestly, how do you?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
Good point, Irish.
Can a Rudy supporter point to a single effort that Rudy made to REALLY push on the federal government over this?
You know, like he did when he took them to court over the best Presidential tool in existence for cutting spending?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
Jason,
“What would I do? Take away any incentive for them staying”
What does that mean, specifically?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:49 pm
Metro,
So you never answered my question.
How about it. Would you just give illegals everything but cause bandaids are easier than long term solutions?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:49 pm
Jason, you’re a Mayor. You can’t deport them.
So you’d immediately put all the kids of the 400,000 on YOUR streets, in a gamble they’d leave?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:49 pm
Did he even once take the INS to court to insist that they enforce the law?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:49 pm
MWS, read 23.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:50 pm
Jason, I’d give them the 3 things Rudy did, for the same reasons.
While your streets were filled with kids, chaos, and crime.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:50 pm
I mean 22.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:50 pm
Trying to make them comfortable with speaking to the authorities by offering them illegal jobs?
And it’s not one quote. It’s his entire double term as Mayor, plus his aborted race against Hillary where he claimed agreement with most of her policies.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:51 pm
Now if only we can get slick Mitt to be as intellectually honest as Mayor Bonham of Chaos City, then Rudy could run ads with imagery of what that city might look like.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:51 pm
Offering them illegal jobs????????
December 6th, 2007 at 7:52 pm
He meant if you were supporting yourself rather than being a criminal, and you know that.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:52 pm
Yes Metro. Offering them employment that, due to their imigration status, violated federal law.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:52 pm
Personally, I’ve got no problem with Rudy allowing sick kids to get treatment, to have the kids of illegal immigrants in school, and to allow illegal immigrants to report crimes without fear of being deported for it.
Given the fact that the federal government wasn’t doing its job, I think those are perfectly good actions to take. In all three cases, it was not only the humane (Christian!) thing to do, but also very much in the interest of the common good.
Based on what I know, I’ve got no problems with Rudy on immigration. There are other reasons I will never vote for him of course, but on this issue, he’s really been quite sensible.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
Metro,
Rudy promoted illegal immigrants in his city. There is no way around that simple fact. You give illegals a reason to come, they will come. Sorry, you start enforcing the laws, they won’t. As a mayor you can direct the arresting of all illegals and hand them over to INS. You could impose large fines, there is plenty you can do.
Giving free schooling, welfare, etc.is not a solution, it’s a bandaid.
MWS,
I meant 22 not 23.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:54 pm
So, Mayor Jason Bonham is on record supporting dumping all kids of NYC’s 400,000 illegals on the streets, without the right to speak to the police, in the hopes their parents might return to their home countries.
This is what passes for good conservative governance today?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:54 pm
murphy, offering them employment?????????
December 6th, 2007 at 7:54 pm
Now if we could grt Rudy to offer bandaid solutions like MEtro…oh wait.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:54 pm
Romney and Giuliani need to call a truce over this. It hurt them both in the debate and in the end I think it nullifies any advantage the GOP has over the dems bcause it shows no one has been effective.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:54 pm
MWS, thank you.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:55 pm
Metro - “Jason, Rudy inherited 400,000 illegals.”
And he thought it wasn’t enough, so he did his best to grow the number.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:55 pm
As Mayor, you can arrest all illegals and hand them over to the INS?????????????????????
December 6th, 2007 at 7:55 pm
The INS would not take them.
What kind of dishonest and stupid argument is that????????????????????????????????
December 6th, 2007 at 7:56 pm
MEtro,
Frame it you want, but offering tax payer services to those illegaly is an incentive to break the law.
What’s funny is you only ideas are to allow bandaid solutions. How does offering schooling to illegals solve the illgal immigration problem, long term?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:57 pm
Jason, the solution is at the federal level!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
December 6th, 2007 at 7:57 pm
Hey, I’ve got an idea, let’s stop ELECTING mayors, and make them Governor appointees. Then local police could be in the direct control of the states. Screw the voters right?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:57 pm
God, this is so simple. Are you that stupid, or that dishonest? Or is it some combination of the two?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:57 pm
Metro: offering them employment?????????
Obviously you are as astounded as I am. Yes. Offering them employment. Giuliani got on his proverbial bull horn and invited everyone south of the border to just swing by the Big Apple and they’d work something out.
He invited MORE illegal immigrants to NYC with the promise of work and protection from the federal government.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:58 pm
Jason, let me repeat: As Mayor, you are a VICTIM of Federal inaction. So you must deal with the issue while lambasting the Feds.
Which is precisely what Rudy did.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:59 pm
Anyway, you soft metro, and show no understanding of incentives and the role they play in society. You deliberately ignore it, jsut to shill for a guy who has a very weak record, while avoiding longterm solutions. You’re sacrificing short term convenience for political expediency.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:59 pm
Jason,
“I would also deny them health care, welfare services, and impose hard enforcement on those who hire illegals.”
So the 5 year old child of illegal immigrants who comes to the hospital with an allergy attack whose throat is swelling shut is just going to have to suffocate? The 60 year old who suffers a heartattack will be left at the entrance to die? The woman with the gun shot wound will be allowed to bleed out on the steps of the hospital?
And even if you are comfortable with treating human beings like Romney’s varmints, you must realize that there is a public interest in deterring the spread of communicable diseases.
Are you suggesting that those who simply cross the border illegally deserve to die?
December 6th, 2007 at 7:59 pm
murphy: He offered nobody jobs. He was contrasting those who were “working hard” with those in criminal lifestyles.
December 6th, 2007 at 7:59 pm
Jason: NOT AT ALL. There is NO solution at the local level, when the Feds won’t enforce the borders.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:00 pm
#55 MWS, thank you for bringing some reason into this.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:00 pm
God, this is so simple. Are you that stupid, or that dishonest? Or is it some combination of the two?
Keep it up metro, you’re on a roll.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:00 pm
Jason, check out #55, you inhuman liar.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:00 pm
Metro,
Just what we need a candidate who says there is no solution. Wow, what a gem Rudy is.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
Metro,
Nobody’s blaming Rudy for inheriting an illegal immigration problem. We’re blaming him for making it worse by inviting more illegal immigrants to NYC by the hundreds of thousands.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
Nothing demonstrates why the Rombots must be kept from power more than threads like this.
It shows so eloquently how despicable you are.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
Jason, check out #55, you inhuman liar.
Keep it up, you look great metro.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
I forget…what did Governor Sanctuary Mansion accomplish on this issue during his term?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
That’s awesome. Metro just called Jason an inhuman liar.
Don’t have a breakdown, buddy.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:02 pm
No solution AT THE LOCAL LEVEL.
It is a FEDERAL ISSUE. IT HAPPENS IN ARIZONA NOT IN NYC.
Grow a freaking brain cell!
December 6th, 2007 at 8:02 pm
Rombots seem to concur that there is no real defense for Mitt’s record. That’s why they ape concern for Rudy’s immigration policies in the 90s and ignore the fact that Mitt was anything but an immigration hardliner from year one to year five after 9/11 — when the security implications of a lax border were screamingly apparent to everyone.
No wonder they’d rather deflect attention onto others’ records. Rombots have my total sympathy, stuck as they are with such an unremarkable product to sell…
December 6th, 2007 at 8:02 pm
So, murphy, Jason, #55?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:03 pm
So the 5 year old child of illegal immigrants who comes to the hospital with an allergy attack whose throat is swelling shut is just going to have to suffocate? The 60 year old who suffers a heartattack will be left at the entrance to die? The woman with the gun shot wound will be allowed to bleed out on the steps of the hospital?
Boy hospitals can treat who they want. I don’t think I ever said this. What I would do is not provide any sort of local funds or any sort of medical payments, any sort of medical welfare.If the illegals want to rack up the bills that’s there choice.
Remember illegals are not dumb, they can look at a situation and make a rational choice, something your argument seems to totally ignore.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
Vicious toward the kids of illegals, and vicious toward Rudy for being intellectually dishonest on this issue.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
Mayor Bonham, your hospitals are funded with City dollars.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
Grow a freaking brain cell!
“Hi my name is Metro, and since I am unable to form a cohesive idea, I throw insults.”
December 6th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
Jason,
“while avoiding longterm solutions”
The longterm solutions have to come from the federal government, you know, the guys in charge of the border? Cities and states can no more SOLVE illegal immigration than they can conduct foreign policy or issue currency.
I suppose someday we can blame the mayor of Cleveland if Iran obtaines nukes?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
Jason, any intelligent observer can see I am dealing with the facts and you are not.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
Pull out the city dollars. They shouldn’t be funding hospitals anyway.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
Cliff: I forget…what did Governor Sanctuary Mansion accomplish on this issue during his term?
Great question Cliff. Start here:
December 6th, 2007 at 8:06 pm
It is a FEDERAL ISSUE. IT HAPPENS IN ARIZONA NOT IN NYC.
Oh I didn’t realize Rudy was sending the illegals to school in AZ, sorry. Why didn’t explain that initially?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
Jason, the in NYC the city OWNS a bunch of the hospitals.
I agree with you if you’re for massive privatization. That’s not the issue.
Until you manage to get NYC to go along with massive privatization, what about illegals coming to the ER?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
Jason, any intelligent observer can see I am dealing with the facts and you are not.
Sure, of course. You are very smart Metro. You are, shell I say…”Metro.”
December 6th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
Jason, you know that any intelligent reader knows what the Arizona reference means.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:08 pm
But you’re already on the record for having the kids of those 400,000 on your streets as sitting ducks and burgeoning criminals.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:08 pm
MarkG: Rombots seem to concur that there is no real defense for Mitt’s record. That’s why they ape concern for Rudy’s immigration policies in the 90s and ignore the fact that Mitt was anything but an immigration hardliner from year one to year five after 9/11
Wow, so wrong. Since back in 1994 Romney was advocating a unique “follow the law” approach to illegal immigration that Rudy never caught onto. In fact, Rudy declared himself the most pro-illegal-immigrant mayor in the country.
See his entire 1994 record here:
http://www.politico.com/pdf/wmr_1994_senate_flier_side_1.pdf
December 6th, 2007 at 8:08 pm
Jason, the in NYC the city OWNS a bunch of the hospitals.
I agree with you if you’re for massive privatization. That’s not the issue.
Sell off the hospitals, and until then charge large bills to illegals who use the services. Imagine that, using capitilism to solve a problem. I understand for a Metro person such as yourself, this may be new.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:08 pm
And now you appear to be on record for letting them die on the sidewalks outside hospitals?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:09 pm
LOL #84, you just dropped the last sentence of #79.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:09 pm
The Union Leader - actually, its publisher - tells us about Romney’s buffoonery on this issue:
http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Romney+as+manager%3F+Not+in+his+backyard&articleId=5fc96c82-a7da-4e24-8cf8-2f1d6406c728
Like a sixth grade teacher with a Post It saying Kick Me stuck on his back by one of the kids.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
You quote #79 in #84, dropping the last sentence of #79, which directly answers #84.
Pure example of intellectual dishonesty.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
Jason, you know that any intelligent reader knows what the Arizona reference means.
I think any intelligent
person could read behind the lines of my retort, and see how foolish you are.
Anyway, off to get the kids to bed.
Feel free to call me Metro, you have my number right?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
Jason,
“Boy hospitals can treat who they want. I don’t think I ever said this.”
Hospitals are required BY LAW to give life saving aid, regardless of ability to pay. Would you allow hospitals to let illegal immigrants die? Is it THAT important to pose as the most ****hardcore**** anti-illegal in the whole west? And you did say that you would deny them “health care.” See number 22.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:11 pm
Put your kids to bed, while you let other kids get shot and die.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:11 pm
I answered the last line of 79 in my post.
Pure example of illiteracy.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:12 pm
Wow, it’s one thing when people have crazy ideologies.
It’s another thing when they openly advocate anarchy on the streets, and are supposedly with a mainstream candidate.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:12 pm
murphy - in that entire quote there’s not a single tangible accomplishment. It’s all window dressing. I ask you again - in the real world, what did Governor Sanctuary Mansion accomplish in a nuts and bolts way?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:12 pm
Metro,
Seriously man. Sometimes your hyperbole makes you sound a few beans short of a burrito.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:12 pm
Jason,
“Pull out the city dollars. They shouldn’t be funding hospitals anyway.”
Translation:
Only the rich should survive heartattacks, blood clots, savage beatings, and allergey attacks.
Is that about the jist of it? How does this line of thinking square with Mormonism?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:12 pm
Put your kids to bed, while you let other kids get shot and die.
This message was brought to you by Ted Kennedy and Moveon.org.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:13 pm
LOL, you idiot, you did NOT answer the last line of #79. Until you managed to get privatization through (if ever), what about people dying in front of the ER every day?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:13 pm
It’s amazing how Jason lies in this thread, about this thread, when the words as here for everyone to see.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:13 pm
murphy, there’s a reason to be angry. And you know it. Because you cannot defend Jason’s logic in this and you know the facts are on my side.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:15 pm
Cliff #94,
You obviously did not read the entire quote. I will make it easier by pulling out selected exerpts…
Governor Romney Vetoed In-State Tuition For Illegal Immigrants
Governor Romney Opposed Efforts To Give Driver’s Licenses To Illegal Immigrants.
Governor Romney Fought Efforts To Weaken Massachusetts’ English Immersion Law.
Not to mention that Romney began efforts to deputize state troopers to arrest illegal immigrants in mid-2006.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:17 pm
Metro,
If the facts were on your side, you wouldn’t have been dodging them for 100+ posts.
Regardless of the situation Rudy inherited from his predecessors, he made it worse. THAT’S what really matters.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:17 pm
ME dodging them? YOU dodging them!
I’ve addressed Rudy’s quote from #2.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:18 pm
Seriously, how do you reconcile the infamous quote, with all the quotes in #10, which are contemporaneous?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:18 pm
I should never go have dinner when there is a chance that a thread can blow up.
Back to the question: Metro, simple question which I would think could be simply answered. Did Rudy Giuliani as Mayor of New York ever sue the INS to enforce the laws regarding deportation?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:20 pm
#2 is nonsense.
Inviting more undocumented workers (with the promise of money and protection) by the hundreds of thousands was not necessary to make NYC safer.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:20 pm
Irish, not that I know of. Did he have any grounds to?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:20 pm
Governor Romney Vetoed In-State Tuition For Illegal Immigrants
Governor Romney Opposed Efforts To Give Driver’s Licenses To Illegal Immigrants.
Governor Romney Fought Efforts To Weaken Massachusetts’ English Immersion Law.
Not to mention that Romney began efforts to deputize state troopers to arrest illegal immigrants in mid-2006.
Murphy - the last of these 4 is universally known to be a complete joke. It came in Romney’s last two weeks in office, with the complete knowledge that Deval Patrick would rescind it immediately. Mitt probably heard Tancredo having tantrums on C-SPAN and siad Wow, this might be an issue when I run for President.
The first three are completely *reactive* measures. They are not in any sense of the word *tangible accomplishemnts*.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:21 pm
Murphy #83: Romney doesn’t have a record in 1994. He also doesn’t have one in 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, or even 2001. He didn’t win in 1994, because voters appear not to have agreed with his stance on that or myriad other issues. MA voters took a long, close look at Mitt back in 1994 and thought long and hard, then decided, “Naw, Teddy’s the one of the two we can trust better.”
But fear not. On Sunday, Mitt can explain on national television just why he found the religion he needed to start cracking Latino skulls as early as 2006 — five years after terrorists with false IDs perpetrated the greatest crime on Americans in more than half a century.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:21 pm
murphy, he was speaking to NYC residents. “We want you here” was not aimed at illegals in Mexico.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:21 pm
There’s Irish, back with that great question.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:21 pm
murphy, if you think #2 is nonsense, how do you reconcile the statement with those in #10, many of which are contemporaneous?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:22 pm
And I agree, the infamous quote was bad word choice by Rudy. But put in context, man.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:22 pm
Jason and Murphy,
Please answer yes or no.
1. Illegal immigrants should be given life saving treatment.
2. Children of illegal immigrants are better off in school than out on the streets.
3a. Illegal immigrants should be encouraged to cooperate with police as witnesses of crimes.
3b. It is more important to reduce violent crime than to posture about how tough one is on illegal immigrants.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:22 pm
MWS, Jason already answered no to those, quite shockingly.
And murphy dodged, not shockingly.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:23 pm
MWS, I LOVE 3b. That shows you how Rombots are a bunch of demagogues who should never be let near the levers of federal power.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:23 pm
MarkG,
I never said anything about Romney taking action against illegal immigration in 1994…indeed, how could he, if he wasn’t elected.
What you said, and it’s clearly false, is that he was not an immigration hardliner until just recently.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:24 pm
Metro, don’t you freaking get it by now? These Rombots thrive on quotes, words, silly rhetoric — it’s all their candidate has. Their candidate’s political resume is paper-thin, so they have to rely on that. They’re at least being consistent when they attack Rudy for something he said rather than what he did. The Rombots care about words. Rudy supporters care about actions.
However, as I always say to the Rombots: You do NOT want to attack our candidate for what he said in 1994.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
Thank you Metro for acknowledging the duplicity of the Giuliani arguments. To answer your question, it seems to me patently obvious that if Rudy was correct in his taking the Feds to court with regard to the Line Item Veto (which at that time was indeed the law of the land, whether or not it would ultimately be ruled unconstitutional), it would be equally correct to take the Feds to court to enforce another law which he complains he couldn’t do anything about because those big bad nasty Feds won’t do anything about it.
Even you might want to acknowledge the logic there.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
MWS — “1. Illegal immigrants should be given life saving treatment.
2. Children of illegal immigrants are better off in school than out on the streets.
3a. Illegal immigrants should be encouraged to cooperate with police as witnesses of crimes.
3b. It is more important to reduce violent crime than to posture about how tough one is on illegal immigrants.”
This makes sense to a sane person. However, when a candidate has no record and needs all the rhetoric he can get (ie; Mitt Romney), it only makes sense to attack opponents for random quotes rather than actions.
Yes, Romney is a demagogue, but you have to feel sorry for him inasmuch as he has no record to stand on.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:27 pm
Thank you Metro for acknowledging the duplicity of the Giuliani arguments. To answer your question, it seems to me patently obvious that if Rudy was correct in his taking the Feds to court with regard to the Line Item Veto (which at that time was indeed the law of the land, whether or not it would ultimately be ruled unconstitutional), it would be equally correct to take the Feds to court to enforce another law which he complains he couldn’t do anything about because those big bad nasty Feds won’t do anything about it. Even you might want to acknowledge the logic there.
Huh..? You can’t just “take the Feds to court” over not deporting illegals. You obviously don’t understand the complexity of the law.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:27 pm
MWS, what do your questions have to do with Rudy inviting more illegal immigrants to take jobs in NYC?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:27 pm
Irish, that would depend if he had LEGAL GROUNDS to win against the INS. It’s a technical question.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:28 pm
murphy, I’ve already speculated on the question you posed to MWS in #122.
You’ve refused to try to put it in context with Rudy’s other statements of record.
You’ve refused to take positions on the actual issues at hand, which MWS, TLG and I have been trying to get you to do. At least Jason was man enough to take a position.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:29 pm
How can we debate the policy if you won’t state your position on it?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:29 pm
I didn’t want to read 123 posts… but I’m skipping to the point about MA police cooperating with the Feds in enforcement. It apparently need Fed approval, a process Mitt started long before the oft cited 18 days before leaving office. That’s just when the go-ahead came down.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:29 pm
Murphy 117: What you said, and it’s clearly false, is that he was not an immigration hardliner until just recently.
Fine. And how many illegals did Mitt round up and hand over to the feds each year he was serving citizens of the Bay State?
When you’re done with that, feel free to explain how he made it illegal for normal, legal MA citizens to work, play, live, or breath after 2006 without proof of health insurance?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
“.. this exchange at last week’s debate between Romney and Rudy Giuliani is worth recalling:
Giuliani: You did have illegal immigrants working at your mansion, didn’t you?
Romney: No, I did not …
I have a feeling that Romney will be asked more than a few questions about that denial at his next press availability. ”
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/CampaignStandard/2007/12/the_sanctuary_mansion_1.asp
December 6th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
121 - Well, TLG, he did just that in the case of the Line Item Veto.
123 - Metro, I know that I’m just a poor RomBot, but it seems to me that on its face, a failure to enforce a law might just have a slim chance of being legal grounds. That’s just me, though.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:33 pm
Irish, it would seem so. But crime reduction was Rudy’s #1 focus, as Mayor, and in his entire career. I’d think if he had legal grounds to get aliens who had committed crimes deported, it would be a top priority.
You, along with murphy, have ducked taking a position on what you’d do regarding #55.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:35 pm
128 - Colin - The fact of the matter is that Romney had a company that he contracted with working at his home. The fact that the company violated the law when hiring employees is not, by any stretch of the law, his responsibility. Don’t let the facts get in the way, though.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:36 pm
I don’t attack Romney on the lawn stuff.
And it’s a distraction from the real issue of Rudy’s NYC record.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:37 pm
Metro, I have no problem answering your question in #55.
I would immediately treat the child (or adult, for that matter) in any life threatening situation.
OK?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:39 pm
MarkG,
I don’t have those stats. But if you’re refering to the success of the state trooper program, we both know it didn’t make it far before Romney’s successor canned it.
I don’t blame Romney for the actions of his successor. I give him credit for his own actions. When I evaluate a politician, I want to see what they did during their time in office. That’s a concept a little foreign to some of the pro-Rudy arguments in this thread. For example, I don’t blame Rudy for inheriting a bad situation. I blame him for compounding the problem by sending out a televised request for more illegal immigration in NYC.
Also, switching the argument to Mitt’s health insurance program will not do you any favors. Not only do you mischaracterize it, but it makes you look like you’re running away from the immigration issue.
Sadly, I don’t have time enough in the day for all this. I’ve got kids to put to bed too.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:40 pm
Wow, a split in the RomBorg!
Do you realize RomUnit Bonham answered that he would refuse them health care?
How about #114, questions 2-3b?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:41 pm
I don’t know what I meant in #134 when I said “sadly”. Figure of speech. I enjoy the kiddies quite a bit more, no offense.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:41 pm
murphy, nice way to dodge the real-life issues through this whole thread by letting Cliff distract you on Romney’s record.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:42 pm
Metro,
I don’t always play the “metro-owns-the-conversation” game. Other people are often times in need of correction as much as you. Bye bye.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
murphy, it was MWS who put the question succinctly in #114.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
Metro, here’s the problem with your questions. You offer them as if there are no alternatives. I’ll return those questions with an easier one:
Is it better to obey the law and avoid the resulting unpleasant consequences, or to disregard the law and force consequences on others who had little if any say in your illegal act?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:47 pm
Damn, so they avoid the real issue by saying I’m trying to own the conversation. The exact same thing happened a few weeks ago, on the exact same question.
That should tell you a lot, dear reader.
At least Jason was man enough to take a position this time, and as you can see, it is an absolutely inhumane and untenable position.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:48 pm
Do you realize RomUnit Bonham answered that he would refuse them health care?
Pretty positive I clarified that to mean I would not pay for it, and not provide any government payment.
“Hi I’m ‘Metro’ and I love to misrepresent others.”
December 6th, 2007 at 8:48 pm
I don’t blame Romney for the actions of his successor. I give him credit for his own actions.
Really? So you condone his taking a completely meaningless action and then offering it as some kind of tangible accomplishment?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:49 pm
#140 Irish, why were you willing to answer #1, but not #2 and #3a-b?
I’d answer #140 just as you would. It does not make #114 go away, the very real-life issues Rudy had to deal with, and with Team Mitt tries to pretend does not exist, so they can viciously smear a true leader.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:50 pm
Anyway,
I guess I am done here with the thread. There is no good faith in arguing back and forth with Metro. I will now turn the floor over to him to throw more wild accusations and distortions, much like his liberal colleagues in the senate.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:52 pm
Hrm, Miss MetroRepublican Manners. An interesting change of persona.
Re: your question, I would enforce the law. If that affects those who did not make the choice, so be it.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:52 pm
145 — What the hell? lol
December 6th, 2007 at 8:52 pm
Jason, but NYC hospitals are public. And the question remains, do support the policy of not having the hospitals report them to the INS?
Even though the INS could only deport less than 1%, that does not mean fearful illegals KNOW that or are willing to gamble with that.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:53 pm
How the hell do these people get onto campaign committees?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:53 pm
Irish Right, you would “enforce the law”? The law Rudy inherited?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:54 pm
How many illegal aliens would live in NYC if they received no services?
If we’re going to get serious it requires local officials making life difficult for the criminals who are working illegally in the US.
No local public services should be offered to illegal aliens.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:54 pm
I’m done — forever — debating Rudy’s illegal immigration record. I know where he stands. The Rombots have admitted that they care more about having good, tough-on-illegals quotes and rhetoric than they do about protecting a city.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:54 pm
Jason, the casual reader can garner a whole lot of information from this thread about who dodges issues and who smears.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:55 pm
TLG, it’s not about convincing Rombots. (LOL!) There are thousands of readers of this blog who never post, and many are undecided.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:55 pm
And it may be the most important issue in the race.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:56 pm
EGS, a valid question, if you were starting with near-zero illegals. But Rudy started with 400,000. What then?
Kids on the streets? People dying on sidewalks outside hospitals? Hoping they’ll find it worse than conditions in their home country, and that your city will survive in the meantime?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:56 pm
Murphy,
“what do your questions have to do with Rudy inviting more illegal immigrants to take jobs in NYC?”
I’m not asking about Rudy’s quote. I’m asking you whether people should be allowed to die because they are here illegally, whether we are better off with the children of illegals running the streets or in schools, and whether reducing violent crime is more important than posturing about illegal immigration.
Please answer the questions.
December 6th, 2007 at 8:57 pm
Thousands, Metro? How many lurkers do you really think get onto this blog and read these comment sections?
December 6th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
#131. Read the exchange carefully. Rudy’s question was very accurately worded. Romney flat out denied it. On the morning after the debate Boston globe photographed two illegal immigrants working at the lawn of Romney.
If Romney was tough on illegal immigration why did he give “second chance” to the company that broke the law? He is a 250 million $ rich man.Why didn’t he employ a fulltime groundskeeper?
If Romney wants to attack Rudy on this issue he should first make sure that he is clean in all respects in this issue. Rudy was right to criticise Romney’s ‘holier than thou’ attitude.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:00 pm
Colin, may be true, but it’s easily deflected by Romney (as he demonstrated), and it allows them the freedom of not answering how THEY would handle Rudy’s real-life problem.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:07 pm
LOL…Another hit piece by Deroy. Once again I wonder why his shtick is even allowed to dirty the front page.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:09 pm
Metro #148, haven’t you noticed that of all the things the Rombots are accusing Rudy of not doing, they cannot explain Romney’s half-hearted actions against illegals — years after 9/11 made such action obviously necessary.
Romney was glad not to chase tax-paying illegals out of MA until the end of his term. He also did not propose or pursue the type of tough anti-illegal laws that are now wrecking the economy of Oklahoma.
Of course, that’s a good thing. Otherwise Romney would have had to arrest his gardening contractor or potentially even turned himself in as an accomplice.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:16 pm
TLG,
A lot more lurkers than you realise.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:17 pm
Irish,
“Re: your question, I would enforce the law. If that affects those who did not make the choice, so be it.”
So you will rely on the heroism of the witness, forcing him to be deported for the sake of bringing justice for an innocent third party. Now the moral dilemma presented here- denying justice to an innocent victim on one hand, and losing one’s home and family for the sake of justice on the other- would make for a great Dostoevsky novel, but it is bad public policy.
I am sure there are untold numbers of victims of crime who have benefited from encouraging illegals to cooperate with police. There are many more- they can’t even know who they are- who were saved from violent crime because the police found criminals, thanks to the cooperation of illegal immigrants.
Are you willing to tell innocent victims of crime they to must suffer more, just so the mayor can puff out his chest and declare his fidelity to immigration law, über allis?
December 6th, 2007 at 9:20 pm
Illegal aliens aren’t supposed to be here. They belong in their rightful nations.
So we don’t need to educate their children because eventually we ought to catch them and send them back.
So whatever occurs to them here is their fault for breaking the law in multiple ways. First they break the law to get here. Then they break the law by working here illegally. Often they do this under the table which is more law breaking.
I don’t want illegal immigrants here. If we need to increase the number of immigrants we allow in legally that’s fine. My stand is that these criminals should face the full force of the law local and national to deprive them of any benefits of a legal resident.
I’d like America to be a nation that welcomes those who come here with permission and has no mercy for those who defile our land by entering illegally. What happens to those people is entirely their fault and we owe them no services or protection.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:27 pm
Deroy Murdock can screw off - i hate seeing his face on Hardball. Deroy SUCKS!!
December 6th, 2007 at 9:27 pm
EGS, even if you want to have no mercy on illegal adults, that ignores the plight of their children, and it also ignores what happens to legal, law-abiding citizens of NYC if crime is allowed to rampant, or communicable disease.
If you put the kids of 400,000 illegals on the streets of NYC during the day, they are sitting ducks, and a whole lot are likely to start committing crimes themselves. When you prevent 400,000 illegals from reporting crime, you are creating a massive market for crime. As an economist, you know this.
What about the law-abiding citizens of NYC, upon whom you are going to foist an unprecedented level of crime? And the children in the streets? On the sidewalks outside Emergency Rooms? (SURELY you’d treat them… even this die-hard libertarian would.)
December 6th, 2007 at 9:28 pm
EGS: I agree that we need to do something to stop illegal immigration. As we all know, it must begin with enforcement within the proper jurisdiction: federal law. At the same time, we should make sure we don’t overreact in such a manner that we jeopardize our economy or dehumanize other who have responded to tacit federal nonchalance about protecting our southern border.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:31 pm
EGS,
I generally agree with you and respect your insights, but you are way off in #165.
Even if you were willing to let the children of illegal immigrants starve, and feared neither God nor man (Biblical reference there for you), isn’t society better off without millions of truant children running around, uneducated with nothing to do? Your policy would be great for concrete and barbed wire companies, as well as private security firms.
When you say, “whatever occurs to them here is their fault for breaking the law in multiple ways,” do you really mean WHATEVER? Do you mean to say that if an illegal immigrant gets beaten, or raped, or murdered it is their own fault? Would you prosecute crimes committed against illegal immigrants, or would it be open season to brutalize them with impunity?
Honestly, as one Christian to another, how can you justify this? Please do not let your respect for the rule of man’s law trump your respect for God’s law.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:36 pm
If illegal immigration is a big issue in Iowa, why is Fred Thompson losing ground there? Of the five candidates only Fred can claim a clean(or no) record. I also recall the double-digit loss of Randy Graf in 2006 general election. He should have won easily if illegal immigration was such a big issue.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:36 pm
EGS,
If you support the notion that illegals should be denied life saving measures, you are effectively saying that illegal entry is a capital offense, that illegals deserve to die for their crime. Do you really think crossing a border illegally is worthy of death, or that innocent children of illegal immigrants deserve to die with their parents?
I hope this isn’t so. Please clarify….
December 6th, 2007 at 10:02 pm
MWS, I do not think that illegal aliens should receive public services because they aren’t part of the American family.
That doesn’t mean I want to bar them from hospitals. I think hospitals should provide emergency service to all and then deal with legal issues a