Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Soul Crusher on January 12, 2011, 09:44:50 AM
-
First Latina governor’s historic inauguration gets little national news coverage
Fox News ^ | 1/11/11 | Christina Corbin
________________________ ________________________ ___
New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez made history when she was sworn in New Year's Day as the nation's first Latina governor.
But the rising GOP star's momentous victory for the Hispanic community earned her little recognition in the national media.
Several mainstream news outlets like the Washington Post and Chicago Tribune -- even FoxNews.com -- neglected to mention her Hispanic heritage, while others such as the New York Times failed to cover the events as she took the oath during a chilly outdoor ceremony on the Santa Fe Plaza.
The apparent oversight prompted some media analysts to question why Martinez – as well as a handful of conservative Hispanics – has been left largely out of the national news spotlight.
"The media is not paying sufficient attention to the number of Hispanic conservatives who are elected to statewide offices and to Congress, especially in the western states," said Mike Gonzalez, vice president of communication at the Heritage Foundation and a former reporter for the Wall Street Journal.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
________________________ ________________________ _______________
This woman is a real ass kicker.
-
Great accomplishment. Nice to see some new blood.
-
Why did it get little coverage? Because she's a Republican. Can't paint that image of the right being full of bigoted whites when it has got blacks and Latinos in its ranks.
-
Why did it get little coverage? Because she's a Republican. Can't paint that image of the right being full of bigoted whites when it has got blacks and Latinos in its ranks.
Yep, that about sums it up.
-
Blatant racism by the liberal media.
-
Blatant racism by the liberal media.
Do you think before you post?
-
Great accomplishment. Nice to see some new blood.
She's blood, vato!
-
Do you think before you post?
Just following your example.
-
Do you think before you post?
Nevermind, I can't follow your example. No one can be as stupid as you. Let me ask you: Did YOU think before you posted the nonsense below:
She calls Obama a terrorist.
Says he wants to destroy the country.
Talks about taking the country back.
Talks about reloading the guns.
Has cross-hairs over the head of her political opponents.
Now she is called upon for all the hate-mongering and she starts whining about thats not what she is about, she is against violence bla.. bla.. etc.. etc
This woman is either one hypocritical bitch or so stupid that she does not realise the words she is saying might be taken very serious by some people
-
Just following your example.
No i dont think much before i post sometimes
-
Nevermind, I can't follow your example. No one can be as stupid as you. Let me ask you: Did YOU think before you posted the nonsense below:
No if i have thought a little before i posted it, i would have remembered that she claimed Obama would create death camps to ;D
And please show me your mighty intellect and tell what part of the post in nonsense
-
Why did it get little coverage? Because she's a Republican. Can't paint that image of the right being full of bigoted whites when it has got blacks and Latinos in its ranks.
Well, maybe because this whole week has been about the AZ incident...this would be front page news had it happened last week
For instance, I saw no real talk about on here about the mailbombs that went off in Annapolis (with letters), and nearby Hanover (near Ft. Meade) and in Washington, DC at a congressperson's office...and even that was overshadowed by the AZ incident...
It did make the national news
-
No if i have thought a little before i posted it, i would have remembered that she claimed Obama would create death camps to ;D
And please show me your mighty intellect and tell what part of the post in nonsense
If you had thought a little you would have understood that nothing she has said in the past can be construed as hate mongering. If your low level of intellect leads you to believe that, then why don't you condemn the Democrats for doing the same thing in 2004? Are Democrats hypocritical or stupid?
Putting crosshairs on a map on someone's head is hate mongering? Do you really think that by doing that she is inciting violence and requesting for that person to be killed? Where the hell are you from? Did you fail to see that it was done in a POLITICAL CONTEXT??If you believe that she is somehow advocating violence by doing that, then you have some deep mental issues.
Believe me, I don't have to be a genius to outwit you. My shoe size is higher than your iq, nitwit.
From 2004 by the Democrat Leadership Committee:
We took screenshots in case Markos tries to hurriedly scrub his site if incriminating posts like he did yesterday (we have this saved page, too):
Also check out Kos’s “target” list (on which Giffords was listed). If we’re going to play the asinine game of metaphorical maps, we can go tit-for-tat all day.
Also check out the Democrat Leadership Committee target list, again, on which Giffords was listed.
(http://bigjournalism.com/files/2011/01/Picture-25.png)
So much for Palin being the only one with "targets" on her maps.
This online article was back in March of 2010. Showing how stupid Democrats were for criticizing Palin when they themselves did the following back in 2004:
http://www.verumserum.com/?p=13647
Democratic Leadership Committe TARGET list:
(http://www.verumserum.com/media/2010/03/DCCC-target-map.jpg)
Each one of those red targets represents a “Targeted Republican” like this one:
(http://www.verumserum.com/media/2010/03/DCCC-targeted-republican.jpg)
There’s even a helpful legend that makes it clear that’s precisely what the little red targets represent:
(http://www.verumserum.com/media/2010/03/DCCC-map-legend.jpg)
-
Well, maybe because this whole week has been about the AZ incident...this would be front page news had it happened last week
For instance, I saw no real talk about on here about the mailbombs that went off in Annapolis (with letters), and nearby Hanover (near Ft. Meade) and in Washington, DC at a congressperson's office...and even that was overshadowed by the AZ incident...
It did make the national news
She was elected in November and this is the first I've heard of it. I had no idea myself.
-
She was elected in November and this is the first I've heard of it. I had no idea myself.
And she was sworn in New year's day...who is gonna pay attention then? Even the National news newscasters are coming off of a hangover...I think her swearing in was not thought out properly...you have people who are pre-occupied on that day with everything else including sports
-
She seems like an ass kicker to me. Her first action was to disband an eviro-nut council that was killing jobs in the state.
-
'Where's that Shoe?'
The Albuquerque Journal ^ | Sean Olson
________________________ ________________________ ____
Gov. Susana Martinez has had only a couple of months to hire a staff that will run the executive branch of state government, build a proposed budget and come up with a legislative agenda before New Mexico lawmakers convene Tuesday.
It hasn't left much time to move.
"We have boxes everywhere," the former district attorney from Las Cruces told the Journal. "I can find one shoe, but not the other. It's very difficult."
Meanwhile, the official Santa Fe digs for the new governor and her husband, former Doña Ana County Undersheriff Chuck Franco, haven't been a quick fit either. They are staying in the one-bedroom guest apartment at the Governor's Mansion while workers paint the primary residential area — a job required in part because it smelled like smoke. "...we've been there 10, 11 days now because there was heavy smoking going on inside the house, cigar and cigarette," Martinez said.
Their dogs have had to be left behind in Las Cruces, at least for now, until they can raise the fences at the Governor's Mansion and prevent wildlife disasters. "There are deer everywhere, and they are on the lawn," Martinez said. "I tell my husband, 'You cannot take out your firearm.' "
Franco, the first gentleman, discovered another possible boon from having Lupe Jackson [the remaining cook] at the mansion, but the governor is not keen on letting him get used to it. "The other day he got caught by Lupe doing the laundry and she said, 'What are you doing?' " Martinez said. "I said, 'Let him do the laundry.' "
(Excerpt) Read more at abqjournal.com ...
-
She's blood, vato!
;D
-
She and her husband seem like grounded decent normal people, unlike the corrupt freak show like Richardson et al.
-
Shes a republican and doesn't look like a bag of smashed assholes with a sombrero.
One other thing to consider-- Ad nauseum I might add, if the political rhetoric is so "violent" how come no other politicians in the crosshairs were shot?
-
This woman kicks ass. she is going far.
TBH - I would not be surprised if she does not get picked for a VP slot.
She has been awesome as a Gov so far.
-
Good shooting.
-
does she have a nice bum??
kinda cool :D
-
Free Republic
Browse · Search Pings · Mail News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.
Judge blocks NM governor on immigrant driver licenses
Fox 59 ^ | September 1, 2011 | Tim Gaynor, Cynthia Johnston
Posted on September 1, 2011 5:23:05 AM EDT by moonshinner_09
SANTA FE, New Mexico (Reuters) - A New Mexico judge on Wednesday blocked a move by the state's Republican governor to make it harder for illegal immigrants to keep driver's licenses in the state.
Governor Susana Martinez's administration last month ordered the state to reverify the physical residency of foreign nationals who hold New Mexico driver's licenses in order to get or keep their licenses.But District Court Judge Sarah Singleton in Santa Fe issued a temporary restraining order blocking the program, arguing in a brief ruling that "irreparable injury" would occur from "constitutional deprivations to the applicants
(Excerpt) Read more at fox59.com ...
Fucking bullshit!
-
She probably speaks fluent english, therefore (as El Rushbo would say) the drive-by media avoid her. I hope she's a genuine conservative Republican and not another RINO.
-
This woman kicks ass. she is going far.
TBH - I would not be surprised if she does not get picked for a VP slot.
She has been awesome as a Gov so far.
My pick for VP.
-
Martinez-mentum: Popular New Mexico governor could be on VP shortlist
By Will Rahn Published: 11:32 PM 12/22/2011 | Updated: 12:58 AM 12/23/2011
Gov. Susana Martinez - Photo by Susan Montoya Bryan- The Associated Press
Will New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez be the next vice president?
“Don’t know her, but on paper I think she looks very impressive,” veteran GOP strategist Mike Murphy, a one-time aide to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, told The Daily Caller.
A conservative former prosecutor, Martinez is the most popular of the new Republican governors elected last fall, with an approval rating at or above 50 percent in a traditionally liberal state.
“What makes Martinez’s numbers so noteworthy is that she’s doing it as a Republican in a state that voted for Barack Obama by 15 points in 2008 and appears ready to do so again next year,” wrote Public Policy Polling, a Democratic-leaning firm, on Wednesday. “In addition to universal support from Republicans, an unusually high 32 percent of Democrats give her good marks and independents approve of her by a 48/38 margin as well.”
“[Florida Sen.] Marco Rubio (40 percent approval in Florida) and [Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (45 percent approval in Virginia) get most of the VP buzz, but Martinez has much more impressive numbers in her home state,” the report continued.
In addition to her popularity, Martinez is also the first Hispanic woman of either party to be elected governor of a state. Come next November, the Latino vote will be heavily contested as the White House seeks to win over enough Hispanics to compensate for President Obama’s low approval ratings among white voters and the GOP looks to make inroads with America’s fastest growing minority group.
Martinez has said she has no interest in being the Republican vice presidential candidate in 2012, and an aide to the governor told TheDC that her position wouldn’t change. But, as in the case with Rubio and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, anything short of a Sherman-esque refusal is unlikely to dampen speculation among her fans.
Ads by GoogleAdam Brickley, a conservative blogger widely credited with first floating the idea of nominating then-Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for the vice presidential spot in 2008, told TheDC that putting Martinez on the ticket would be “a good idea.”
“She’s certainly one of the more viable options,” Brickley told TheDC. “A lot of Hispanic people have been bandied about as options, and she would certainly be on the short list considering she’s popular, effective and conservative. She’s got everything she needs, so she’s somebody I’d consider.”
While New Mexico only has five electoral votes, it’s an important swing state. President George W. Bush lost the state by a razor-thin margin in 2000 — the closest election in modern times — but won it in 2004.
Should Martinez join the Republican ticket next year, chances are she won’t be the only New Mexican running for executive office. Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson is expected to declare his candidacy for the Libertarian nomination next week, and is currently polling at 23 percent support in the state against Romney and Obama.
Follow Will on Twitter
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/22/martinez-mentum-popular-new-mexico-governor-could-be-on-vp-shortlist/#ixzz1hNxlfNUr
-
this thread is worthless without her pics
-
Latina Republican? That's cool. I wonder how rising conservative Hispanics will change the GOP's stance on immigration.
-
Latina Republican? That's cool. I wonder how rising conservative Hispanics will change the GOP's stance on immigration.
Hey Howard,
*uck off again.
Best,
GW
(ps see the Sudanese immigration thread)
-
Latina Republican? That's cool. I wonder how rising conservative Hispanics will change the GOP's stance on immigration.
If you're a real Republican and not a dumbfuck RINO, then illegal is just that - Illegal. Get the fuck out of the U.S.A and take your
fucking beanpods with you. If you're illegally here, then so are the turdlings you pump out.
American here. Not African-American. Not Irish-American. Not German-American. Not Mexican-American. I don't believe in hyphenating my loyalty and neither should any real American. People should never be allowed here that aren't loyal to this country. Fuck that noise.
Here to help. ;D
-
If you're a real Republican and not a dumbfuck RINO, then illegal is just that - Illegal. Get the fuck out of the U.S.A and take your
fucking beanpods with you. If you're illegally here, then so are the turdlings you pump out.
American here. Not African-American. Not Irish-American. Not German-American. Not Mexican-American. I don't believe in hyphenating my loyalty and neither should any real American. People should never be allowed here that aren't loyal to this country. Fuck that noise.
Here to help. ;D
Post of the year nominee.
Howard--- go *uck yourself
-
If you're a real Republican and not a dumbfuck RINO, then illegal is just that - Illegal. Get the fuck out of the U.S.A and take your
fucking beanpods with you. If you're illegally here, then so are the turdlings you pump out.
American here. Not African-American. Not Irish-American. Not German-American. Not Mexican-American. I don't believe in hyphenating my loyalty and neither should any real American. People should never be allowed here that aren't loyal to this country. Fuck that noise.
Here to help. ;D
I like it. :)
-
If you're a real Republican and not a dumbfuck RINO, then illegal is just that - Illegal. Get the fuck out of the U.S.A and take your
fucking beanpods with you. If you're illegally here, then so are the turdlings you pump out.
American here. Not African-American. Not Irish-American. Not German-American. Not Mexican-American. I don't believe in hyphenating my loyalty and neither should any real American. People should never be allowed here that aren't loyal to this country. Fuck that noise.
Here to help. ;D
Okay, but what to do with legal immigration? Should we just starve our businesses of labor and send them to bankruptcy court?
-
Okay, but what to do with legal immigration? Should we just starve our businesses of labor and send them to bankruptcy court?
We don't need to do anything with legal immigration.
Businesses will not starve. They need to obey the law like everyone else. Businesses always adapt. And if a business cannot survive without illegal alien labor, then yes, it should fold its tent and go do something else.
-
We don't need to do anything with legal immigration.
Businesses will not starve. They need to obey the law like everyone else. Businesses always adapt. And if a business cannot survive without illegal alien labor, then yes, it should fold its tent and go do something else.
So you're okay with:
1) Adding more entrepreneurs to the unemployment rolls.
and
2) Reducing the amount of goods produced in the United States, thus increasing prices/reducing real wages?
-
So you're okay with:
1) Adding more entrepreneurs to the unemployment rolls.
and
2) Reducing the amount of goods produced in the United States, thus increasing prices/reducing real wages?
1. No. I'm ok with enforcing the laws regarding legal and illegal immigration.
2. No. I believe businesses will adapt and competition will control prices and increase wages.
-
1. No. I'm ok with enforcing the laws regarding legal and illegal immigration.
So you're okay with enforcing laws that would put entrepreneurs out of business but you're not okay with putting entrepreneurs out of business?
2. No. I believe businesses will adapt and competition will control prices and increase wages.
Prices and wages are ultimately determined by supply and demand. You reduce the supply of labor, you increase the price of labor. However, that causes many businesses to ramp down production, which decrease the supply of goods and thus increase the price that workers would have to pay for those goods. So, in the end, you'd end up with a weaker economy and you'd leave everyone worse off.
-
So you're okay with enforcing laws that would put entrepreneurs out of business but you're not okay with putting entrepreneurs out of business?
Prices and wages are ultimately determined by supply and demand. You reduce the supply of labor, you increase the price of labor. However, that causes many businesses to ramp down production, which decrease the supply of goods and thus increase the price that workers would have to pay for those goods. So, in the end, you'd end up with a weaker economy and you'd leave everyone worse off.
It's not the Hobson's Choice you're trying to portray. If an entrepreneur cannot survive without illegal alien workers, it shouldn't be in business. And if it that particular business fails, another one will take it's place. That's how our system works.
We're not going to reduce the labor supply, because businesses will hire legal workers like they should be doing anyway. There are plenty of American citizens who can take the place of illegals.
-
It's not the Hobson's Choice you're trying to portray. If an entrepreneur cannot survive without illegal alien workers, it shouldn't be in business. And if it that particular business fails, another one will take it's place. That's how our system works.
We're not going to reduce the labor supply, because businesses will hire legal workers like they should be doing anyway. There are plenty of American citizens who can take the place of illegals.
If there were plenty of American citizens willing to take the jobs that illegals take, then there would be no incentive for illegals to migrate to the States since those jobs would already be taken by Americans. The fact that America attracts so many immigrants is proof enough that the domestic market supply of labor does not meet the domestic market demand - the immigrant labor is what fills that gap and makes the economy function.
Reducing the labor force by 10 million or so will necessarily reduce the supply of labor and thus harm businesses that rely on cheap, unskilled labor.
In the end, the reduced labor supply won't even helped low-skilled American workers, since reducing the supply of low-skilled labor in the States will simply shift production of those goods to foreign countries.
You're looking at creating a lose-lose situation.
-
If there were plenty of American citizens willing to take the jobs that illegals take, then there would be no incentive for illegals to migrate to the States since those jobs would already be taken by Americans. The fact that America attracts so many immigrants is proof enough that the domestic market supply of labor does not meet the domestic market demand - the immigrant labor is what fills that gap and makes the economy function.
Reducing the labor force by 10 million or so will necessarily reduce the supply of labor and thus harm businesses that rely on cheap, unskilled labor.
In the end, the reduced labor supply won't even helped low-skilled American workers, since reducing the supply of low-skilled labor in the States will simply shift production of those goods to foreign countries.
You're looking at creating a lose-lose situation.
I'm looking at making people obey the law.
I disagree about the available workforce. Businesses will cut corners to increase profits using whatever means are available. Some legal. Some illegal. The only reason some businesses knowingly hire illegals is because they can. If we do a better job of patrolling our borders, get rid of anchor babies, and crack down even more on businesses that knowingly hire illegals, those businesses that should survive will. And American citizens will be the beneficiaries, because more American citizens will be employed as a result.
This notion that we have no choice but keep and deal with illegals is absurd.
-
I'm looking at making people obey the law.
I disagree about the available workforce. Businesses will cut corners to increase profits using whatever means are available. Some legal. Some illegal. The only reason some businesses knowingly hire illegals is because they can. If we do a better job of patrolling our borders, get rid of anchor babies, and crack down even more on businesses that knowingly hire illegals, those businesses that should survive will. And American citizens will be the beneficiaries, because more American citizens will be employed as a result.
This notion that we have no choice but keep and deal with illegals is absurd.
Come on - THIS IS BASIC ECONOMICS. You cannot reduce the labor force by 10 million (or 5 million or however large the illegal immigrant workforce) and not face any consequences. IF Americans were willing to take the jobs at the wages that illegals hold and were able to do those jobs as competently as illegal immigrants, THEN there would be no immigration in the first place since Americans would hold those jobs and there would be no demand for illegal immigrant labor! If you kick those immigrant workers out, then you'll harm businesses bottom line AND YOU KNOW IT. And I know you're not stupid enough to actually believe that businesses will take a hit on the chin and not do anything about it. They'll respond by producing less, by hiring less, etc. In the end, it will harm Americans. And, the worst part is that low-skilled American workers won't even see a pay raise! Those jobs won't stay in the United States, they will simply go overseas to somewhere where low-skilled labor is abundant. But in the process you'll destroy all of the supporting jobs and US businesses that rely on immigrant labor.
-
Come on - THIS IS BASIC ECONOMICS. You cannot reduce the labor force by 10 million (or 5 million or however large the illegal immigrant workforce) and not face any consequences. IF Americans were willing to take the jobs at the wages that illegals hold and were able to do those jobs as competently as illegal immigrants, THEN there would be no immigration in the first place since Americans would hold those jobs and there would be no demand for illegal immigrant labor! If you kick those immigrant workers out, then you'll harm businesses bottom line AND YOU KNOW IT. And I know you're not stupid enough to actually believe that businesses will take a hit on the chin and not do anything about it. They'll respond by producing less, by hiring less, etc. In the end, it will harm Americans. And, the worst part is that low-skilled American workers won't even see a pay raise! Those jobs won't stay in the United States, they will simply go overseas to somewhere where low-skilled labor is abundant. But in the process you'll destroy all of the supporting jobs and US businesses that rely on immigrant labor.
This is basic common sense. You can't even decide whether illegals account for 5 or 10 million? Seriously? How can you even make any kind of reasonable argument if you're dealing with five million worker spread?
In any event, I've been in business long enough to know that businesses adapt. It is true they don't just "take it on the chin," but it's also true that they have to be competitive to remain viable/profitable. Not every business knowingly hires illegals. The businesses that do, and are forced to hire American citizens, will be fine.
There will not be some across the board increase in the cost of goods and services, because not every business knowingly hires illegals. It's nothing like raising taxes on business, which affects all of them.
If every business was forced to replace significant portions of their employees, you might have a point.
-
Do you think before you post?
of course not
-
This is basic common sense. You can't even decide whether illegals account for 5 or 10 million? Seriously? How can you even make any kind of reasonable argument if you're dealing with five million worker spread?
It doesn't matter. I'm using the number to illustrate a point.
And the point is basic economics. You cannot reduce the supply of labor and expect there to be no negative consequences.
In any event, I've been in business long enough to know that businesses adapt. It is true they don't just "take it on the chin," but it's also true that they have to be competitive to remain viable/profitable. Not every business knowingly hires illegals. The businesses that do, and are forced to hire American citizens, will be fine.
Yes, and you're missing the basic economics here. What happens when your reduce the labor supply? The wages to hire the same amount of labor as before will have to go up. But it is not profitable to produce the same amount as before with less labor (or the same amount of labor that costs more). So, in the end, production and thus national output will fall. This doesn't just hurt illegals or businesses, but everyone.
There will not be some across the board increase in the cost of goods and services, because not every business knowingly hires illegals. It's nothing like raising taxes on business, which affects all of them.
It will affect the goods that rely on illegal immigrant labor, such as manual farm work.
If every business was forced to replace significant portions of their employees, you might have a point.
No, the argument applies even if 0.0001% of businesses have to replace a significant portion of employees. It's the basic laws of supply and demand. You decrease supply, there will be consequences. We do not live in a world without cause and effect.
-
It doesn't matter. I'm using the number to illustrate a point.
And the point is basic economics. You cannot reduce the supply of labor and expect there to be no negative consequences.
Yes, and you're missing the basic economics here. What happens when your reduce the labor supply? The wages to hire the same amount of labor as before will have to go up. But it is not profitable to produce the same amount as before with less labor (or the same amount of labor that costs more). So, in the end, production and thus national output will fall. This doesn't just hurt illegals or businesses, but everyone.
It will affect the goods that rely on illegal immigrant labor, such as manual farm work.
No, the argument applies even if 0.0001% of businesses have to replace a significant portion of employees. It's the basic laws of supply and demand. You decrease supply, there will be consequences. We do not live in a world without cause and effect.
The numbers are kind of important, because they directly impact the point you're trying to make.
Your supply and demand comments are based on a false premise: that kicking out illegals will reduce the labor force. It will not. If we kick every illegal out of the country there will be American citizens taking their places. Illegals are not filling jobs that Americans are incapable of performing. They're taking jobs away from American citizens. They're also costing us a lot of money.
There will not be some catastrophic impact on business. Some businesses will shut down, only to be replaced by others. Some will be completely unaffected. Some will have to reduce their profit margin to remain competitive.
-
The numbers are kind of important, because they directly impact the point you're trying to make.
Your supply and demand comments are based on a false premise: that kicking out illegals will reduce the labor force. It will not. If we kick every illegal out of the country there will be American citizens taking their places. Illegals are not filling jobs that Americans are incapable of performing. They're taking jobs away from American citizens. They're also costing us a lot of money.
There will not be some catastrophic impact on business. Some businesses will shut down, only to be replaced by others. Some will be completely unaffected. Some will have to reduce their profit margin to remain competitive.
If illegals were taking jobs that Americans would be willing to fill, then there would be no illegals in this country in the first place! Those jobs would have already been taken by Americans and illegals would have no reason to come to the States!
-
If illegals were taking jobs that Americans would be willing to fill, then there would be no illegals in this country in the first place! Those jobs would have already been taken by Americans and illegals would have no reason to come to the States!
If we actually enforced our own immigration laws, those jobs would've been filled by Americans in the first place.
As BB said, if you can't run a profitable business without breaking the law, you shouldn't be in business.
-
If we actually enforced our own immigration laws, those jobs would've been filled by Americans in the first place.
As BB said, if you can't run a profitable business without breaking the law, you shouldn't be in business.
If Americans would be willing to fill those jobs, then those businesses wouldn't have hired illegal immigrants. It's basic economics: there are job vacancies that Americans won't fill, and those jobs act as a magnate that attracts more immigrants.
-
If Americans would be willing to fill those jobs, then those businesses wouldn't have hired illegal immigrants. It's basic economics: there are job vacancies that Americans won't fill, and those jobs act as a magnate that attracts more immigrants.
Wrong again-- Employers broke the law by hiring these people in the first place. Their profits come from the cost savings of not having to pay what any legal American worker would be entitled to under the law. Plenty of Americans would love those jobs, but not for pennies on the dollar of what they are supposed to be making.
Minus the welfare class, the vast majority of unemployed Americans would love to have any job instead of sitting around begging and getting handouts.
-
If you're a real Republican and not a dumbfuck RINO, then illegal is just that - Illegal. Get the fuck out of the U.S.A and take your
fucking beanpods with you. If you're illegally here, then so are the turdlings you pump out.
American here. Not African-American. Not Irish-American. Not German-American. Not Mexican-American. I don't believe in hyphenating my loyalty and neither should any real American. People should never be allowed here that aren't loyal to this country. Fuck that noise.
Here to help. ;D
actually I have heard very few black people use the term "african american"....thats a political term used on tv and in politics mostly..were refer to ourselves as black and leave it at that
-
I. Think the name "Àndreiasdamn" was on those targets she hÍt.
-
I. Think the name "Àndreiasdamn" was on those targets she hÍt.
your face will be a target of my golden showers when we meet :)
-
actually I have heard very few black people use the term "african american"....thats a political term used on tv and in politics mostly..were refer to ourselves as black and leave it at that
most of the time on Webster ave I heard you guys refer to each other as something worse. But let's leave it alone.
-
Wrong again-- Employers broke the law by hiring these people in the first place. Their profits come from the cost savings of not having to pay what any legal American worker would be entitled to under the law. Plenty of Americans would love those jobs, but not for pennies on the dollar of what they are supposed to be making.
Minus the welfare class, the vast majority of unemployed Americans would love to have any job instead of sitting around begging and getting handouts.
So you are conceding my point - that kicking out illegals would necessarily increase the cost of labor which would lead to less production taking place inside the United States and less profits being earned by businesses inside the United States.
-
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/07/01/eveningnews/main20076243.shtml (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/07/01/eveningnews/main20076243.shtml)
Illegal immigration crackdown impacts harvests
(CBS News)
WRAY, Ga., - One of the toughest laws yet to fight illegal immigration went into effect today in Georgia. A federal judge has temporarily blocked the most controversial provision - requiring police to check the immigration status of suspects who don't have proper identification.
But it is now a felony to use false documentation to apply for a job. CBS News correspondent Mark Strassmann says Georgia farmers have been anticipating this day, and the law is already having a big effect.
In south Georgia, it's a banner year for blackberries - but a bad year for berry farmer Gary Paulk.
"There's a lot of what appear to be good berries," Paulk said. "If we had the workers."
On one corner of this family farm, twenty acres of blackberries rot away.
"This is a healthy field. And it should have been picked," Paulk said. "But there's nobody here."
Despite economy, Americans don't want farm work
Too many Mexican and Guatemalan pickers this year stayed away. They're scared away by Georgia's new crackdown on illegal immigration.
Paulk said "they're scared they will be raided on the field."
Ignacia Martinez is here illegally. She stayed, but her husband left to work farms in Washington state. They wanted to avoid any chance they'd both get arrested.
"Please leave us here," she said. "Please have some consideration with us. We're not here to harm anybody."
She's one of 200 workers picking Paulk's berries. He needs 100 more.
Money doesn't grow on trees, but it does fall from these bushes. Unpicked blackberries - for this farm, is a loss of $10,000 an acre - $200,000 in all.
Supporters of Georgia's new immigration law argued legal workers should be easy to find in a state where the unemployment rate's almost ten percent. But farmers like Paulk know most Americans want no part of picking blackberries. It's hot, back-breaking work, for $12 an hour.
Becky Musgrove started picking two weeks ago. "Sometimes I'm lazy when it's real, real hot, I don't come back in the afternoons. And that's bad to say."
"It's hard labor. And the work force is not here in America. So where's it gonna come from?" Paulk asks. "My grand-parents and my great-great-parents are buried just on that hill, a few miles from here. And I'd hate for Gary Paulk to be the one who buried the farm."
Paulk's farm faces a bigger crisis: too few hands to pick 600 acres of grapes ready for harvest next month.
We wanted to know more about how Georgia's immigration law came about. The governor's office told us today the state had to impose the law in its own defense. The state estimates illegal immigrants cost Georgia taxpayers more than $2 billion a year. Most of that to pay for the schooling and medical bills of their children.
-
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2011/1022/Anti-illegal-immigration-bill-stokes-backlash-in-Alabama-fields (http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2011/1022/Anti-illegal-immigration-bill-stokes-backlash-in-Alabama-fields)
Anti-illegal immigration bill stokes backlash in Alabama fields
Farmers in states like Alabama that have passed strong anti-illegal immigration laws are fighting back, saying they are losing labor and that US workers are unwilling to take up farm work.
Farmers fearing a labor shortage are protesting recent immigration laws they say are too harsh, forcing undocumented workers to flee to prevent deportation. They say US workers are unwilling to endure the rigorous conditions of farm work and that state legislators need to come up with solutions to prevent local agribusiness from going under.
More than 100 farmers and three state representatives in Alabama responded to the recent enactment of a slate of anti-illegal immigration laws by holding a public hearing this week in Oneonta, about 35 miles northeast of Birmingham. The farmers complained that they were already seeing laborers pack up and leave the state.
The new immigration laws will result in a $40 million hit to the state’s economy, with 10,000 illegal workers, each making about $5,000 a year, set to leave, according to a report released this week by the University of Alabama’s Center for Business and Economic Research.
-
Milton Friedman on immigration:
-
most of the time on Webster ave I heard you guys refer to each other as something worse. But let's leave it alone.
you're one of those guys....you like saying that word
-
Judge Andrew Napolitano and GMU economist Don Boudreaux on immigration:
-
Majority of N.M. Dems Like Martinez, Poll Says
The Albuquerque Journal ^ | February 27, 2012 | Michael Coleman
A majority of New Mexico Democrats have a favorable opinion of Republican Gov. Susana Martinez, and President Barack Obama would easily defeat either of the current top two Republican candidates in a New Mexico contest, according to a new Rasmussen poll.
~~snip~~
Fifty-four percent of New Mexico Democrats have a favorable opinion of the governor, while 94 percent of Republicans view her favorably. Sixty-six percent of all likely New Mexico voters viewed the governor favorably.
Seventy percent of New Mexico men and 66 percent of the state’s women approve of Martinez, according to the Rasmussen poll. Fifty-eight percent of New Mexico Hispanics approve of Martinez.
(Excerpt) Read more at abqjournal.com ...
-
If you're a real Republican and not a dumbfuck RINO, then illegal is just that - Illegal. Get the fuck out of the U.S.A and take your
fucking beanpods with you. If you're illegally here, then so are the turdlings you pump out.
American here. Not African-American. Not Irish-American. Not German-American. Not Mexican-American. I don't believe in hyphenating my loyalty and neither should any real American. People should never be allowed here that aren't loyal to this country. Fuck that noise.
Here to help. ;D
So i guess your a native american huh.. ???
-
Bump. - my prediction is that mittens picks her.
she is bad ass, hard right, gets the west coast vote, is a lawyer, etc.
-
Why did it get little coverage? Because she's a Republican. Can't paint that image of the right being full of bigoted whites when it has got blacks and Latinos in its ranks.
exactly sad democrat narrative that must be exploded
-
Bump. - my prediction is that mittens picks her.
she is bad ass, hard right, gets the west coast vote, is a lawyer, etc.
unlike you
-
Updated: Plane Carrying Governor Crash-Lands at Santa Fe; No Injuries (NM Martinez)
Albuquerque Journal North ^ | May 24, 2012 | Dan Boyd
Posted on May 25, 2012 8:03:07 PM EDT by CedarDave
SANTA FE – A private plane carrying Gov. Susana Martinez and her husband, Chuck Franco, landed at Santa Fe Municipal Airport without its landing gear down Wednesday night, but there were no injuries, the governor’s spokesman said.
Matt Chandler, district attorney for the 9th Judicial District, also was on board, but was not injured, said spokesman Scott Darnell.
The emergency landing took place at about 10 p.m.
The governor was returning from a campaign event in Tucumcari for Republican state Senate candidate Angie Spears. The Spears campaign paid for the flight, Darnell said.
Gov. Susana Martinez told reporters this morning she saw sparks flying when a small plane carrying her and others crash-landed at Santa Fe Municipal Airport Wednesday night, but she said the incident won’t keep her from taking more flights on small planes.
Speaking for the first time since the incident about 10 p.m. Wednesday, Martinez said she initially thought a tire had blown on the plane’s landing gear.
“It wasn’t scary, in the sense that we didn’t realize what had happened until it happened,” Martinez told reporters after a childhood reading event in Española this morning. “The plane was not destroyed — nothing was broken off or flew off.”
(Excerpt) Read more at abqjournal.com ...