Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...
OMTE

Broxton, GA

#18734 Jul 18, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Whose fault is that? Try overstaying your visa in Mexico and they will put your butt in the pokey.
These people are creating an illegal act of over staying their visas, which is a crime.
Odd, most every other country in the modern world manages to keep track of who is in their country. If Mexico can do it,why can't we?
I was just saying some where illegal immigrants and some where border hopping illegal aliens, and that I thought both terms were valid.

Since: Jul 12

Douglasville, GA

#18735 Jul 18, 2013
formerresident wrote:
Dating me, as I am reflecting back to late 70's.
Do the fines cost more or less then the cost of hire? If I am charged a 2000 fine for hiring illegally, and I can hire labor at 5.00 an hour, instead of 11.00 an hour, it may be more lucrative to just pay the fine.
It actually takes quite a few people to pick all the fruits and vegetables that come out of california. Of course that isn't the only industry. Construction is another.
What I don't understand is how and why this got so out of hand, and is so visible today. I mean living there in the 70's it was a huge problem that I never heard the first word about.
( they were focussed on medflies back then!:)
I doubt that they will work for $5.00 an hour. I think they are paid by what they produce. A 10,000.00 fine would do the trick.
Just look at all the good paying American jobs that have been lost to illegals in the construction industry.
It has happened because of business's and the government working together to make cheap wages and high profits. That's the truth.
jeb stuart

Cordele, GA

#18736 Jul 18, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>Given your views on the subject, I understand how you see it that way, but at least you do admit that there is more to it than just a matter of "5 mos."
OMTE, your and Ag's views on this subject differ, but my only point here is that this new law in Texas is not about protecting the safety of women. It is about restricting the right of women to have an abortion- or at the very least, making it more difficult to do so. That is all I am trying to say. The law was not enacted because women were dying of substandard services in clinics.

Since: Jul 12

Douglasville, GA

#18737 Jul 18, 2013
OMTE wrote:
<quoted text>I was just saying some where illegal immigrants and some where border hopping illegal aliens, and that I thought both terms were valid.
If they are here illegally than they are illegal aliens. Illegal immigrants sounds so much more legal and nice doesn't it? It doesn't sound as bad. That is why the PC people want that term used.
jeb stuart

Cordele, GA

#18738 Jul 18, 2013
sorry, I meant to say that your and Ag's view differ from mine....

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#18739 Jul 18, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>Given your views on the subject, I understand how you see it that way, but at least you do admit that there is more to it than just a matter of "5 mos."
But wouldn't you agree that the other two provisions are merely common sense requirements to protect the health of the patients, rather than the "onerous restrictions intended only to limit a woman's right to chose" that the pro-choice side claims? How in the world can expecting an abortion clinic to merely meet the same standards as a free standing surgical clinic be considered unreasonable?
OMTE

Broxton, GA

#18740 Jul 18, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
<quoted text>
If they are here illegally than they are illegal aliens. Illegal immigrants sounds so much more legal and nice doesn't it? It doesn't sound as bad. That is why the PC people want that term used.
Actually they have now condemned the term "illegal" when referring to any aliens or immigrants now. Check it out.
jeb stuart

Cordele, GA

#18741 Jul 18, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I doubt that they will work for $5.00 an hour. I think they are paid by what they produce. A 10,000.00 fine would do the trick.
Just look at all the good paying American jobs that have been lost to illegals in the construction industry.
It has happened because of business's and the government working together to make cheap wages and high profits. That's the truth.
But I don't believe any of this will ever happen because the employers and the politicians are in cahoots, as usual.
OMTE

Broxton, GA

#18742 Jul 18, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
But wouldn't you agree that the other two provisions are merely common sense requirements to protect the health of the patients, rather than the "onerous restrictions intended only to limit a woman's right to chose" that the pro-choice side claims? How in the world can expecting an abortion clinic to merely meet the same standards as a free standing surgical clinic be considered unreasonable?
They're killin babies. Do you think they care about their safety? I think they're just happy to have someone that's willing to help them murder their "mistake".
jeb stuart

Cordele, GA

#18743 Jul 18, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
But wouldn't you agree that the other two provisions are merely common sense requirements to protect the health of the patients, rather than the "onerous restrictions intended only to limit a woman's right to chose" that the pro-choice side claims? How in the world can expecting an abortion clinic to merely meet the same standards as a free standing surgical clinic be considered unreasonable?
whether it is "common sense" or not, I think that it is just one more attempt by anti-abortion activists to restrict a womans' right to the service.
jeb stuart

Cordele, GA

#18744 Jul 18, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
But wouldn't you agree that the other two provisions are merely common sense requirements to protect the health of the patients, rather than the "onerous restrictions intended only to limit a woman's right to chose" that the pro-choice side claims? How in the world can expecting an abortion clinic to merely meet the same standards as a free standing surgical clinic be considered unreasonable?
I am not going to get into the moral or religious aspects of the issue- at least not tonight.
jeb stuart

Cordele, GA

#18745 Jul 18, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
<quoted text>
If they are here illegally than they are illegal aliens. Illegal immigrants sounds so much more legal and nice doesn't it? It doesn't sound as bad. That is why the PC people want that term used.
you know that if say, a man and woman came here illegally 15 yrs. ago and had 4 children that the children are U.S. citizens? If we send the parents back, what should we do with the children? I am just asking?
jeb stuart

Cordele, GA

#18746 Jul 18, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
Amen! I completely agree.
what do you mean you agree completely- I think that I recall you saying that you were pro- choice. flip- flop?
OMTE

Broxton, GA

#18747 Jul 18, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>you know that if say, a man and woman came here illegally 15 yrs. ago and had 4 children that the children are U.S. citizens? If we send the parents back, what should we do with the children? I am just asking?
Send them back too. They shouldn't be citizens.
formerresident

Decatur, GA

#18748 Jul 18, 2013
Big dave, I agree, the employers and government are in cahoots.
Jeb, I think we have to fix each problem individually, for those already here.
We didn't secure the borders. We didn't protect our own freedom. We are to blame. And why can't we secure our borders? That is ridiculous. We are America. We are a superpower.
We can't send the parents back and not the children. They will end up in our welfare system costing us more money.
Trade them. We will give you one welfare recipient, for one producing illegal.
jeb stuart

Cordele, GA

#18749 Jul 18, 2013
OMTE wrote:
<quoted text>Send them back too. They shouldn't be citizens.
but they are, by law...
OMTE

Broxton, GA

#18750 Jul 18, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>but they are, by law...
There are many laws that are government choose to ignore. What makes that one so special?
Why

Jefferson, GA

#18751 Jul 19, 2013
OMTE wrote:
<quoted text> I am not a fan of war and republicans love it. Ya know?

Really?? Perhaps there is history before our time.


Under the leadership of Democratic President Woodrow Wilson, World War I

Under the leadership Democratic President FDR, World War II.

Under the leadership of Democratic President Harry Truman, Korean War.

Under the leadership of Democratic President Lyndon Johnson, Vietnam War.

Under the leadership of Republican President George H.W. Bush, Iraq War I

Under the leadership of Republican President George W. Bush, Iraq War II and Afghanistan War.


Why

Jefferson, GA

#18752 Jul 19, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
<quoted text>
O.K. I got your meaning now. I just wasted 5 minutes replying to you for no reason.

The story of many posters, "a waste of time."


Why

Jefferson, GA

#18753 Jul 19, 2013
"Obama ponders canceling Moscow talks with Putin."

Obama pitching a temper fit, what else is new. His Diplomacy sucks on the world stage, as does his picks of Sec of State.
Where is Kerry hiding out while the Diplomatic ranks wither on the vine.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_OBA...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Thunderbolt Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Does anybody know Sarah milford 4 hr Randy 3
Where can I cop h? (Jan '17) 5 hr Savannah Sessions 4
News Training at Fort Stewart heard across Coastal E... (Mar '14) Aug 5 Retired Military 2
News Suit certified as class action (Mar '08) Aug 3 RealAttorney 13
Where can I get layed (Nov '16) Jul 29 Savannah Sessions 3
What percent of white women are with black men ... (Apr '13) Jul 29 Savannah Sessions 100
Shia Labeouf Jul 29 Savannah Sessions 2

Thunderbolt Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Thunderbolt Mortgages