# Liberty Movement > Rand Paul Forum >  Rand Paul to Illegals: We Will Find a Place for You.......

## Origanalist

*Rand Paul to Illegals: We Will Find a Place for You;' Envisions 12 Million New Taxpayers* 

June 12, 2013 - 10:21 AM 



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



By Terence P. Jeffrey

(CNSNews.com) - In his prepared text for a speech he is delivering today at the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference and Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles, Sen. Rand Paul (R.-Ky.) said to illegal aliens who want to live and work in the United States: [W]e will find a place for you.

Paul also said he envisions todays illegal aliens becoming additional taxpayers.

Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers, said Paul.

Illegal aliens working in the United States today are not exempted from complying with the nation's tax laws anymore than they are exempted from complying with U.S. laws governing immigration or document fraud.

First, everyone has to acknowledge that we arent going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants, said Paul. If you wish to work, if you wish to live and work in America, then we will find a place for you.

In order to bring conservatives to this cause however, those who work for reform must understand that a real solution must ensure that our borders are secure, said Paul. But we also must treat those who are already here with understanding and compassion.

Paul said that his plan would first secure the border and then grant work visas to illegal aliens.

The first part of my plan--border security--must be certified by Border Patrol and an Investigator General and then voted on by Congress to ensure it has been accomplished, said Paul. This is what I call, Trust but Verify.

With this in place, I believe conservatives will accept what needs to come next, an issue that must be addressed: what becomes of the 12 million undocumented workers in the United States? said Paul.

My plan is very simple and will include work visas for those who are here, who are willing to come forward and work, he said.

Paul said that his plan is not an amnesty but will put illegal aliens into a probationary period.

Conservatives are wary of amnesty. My plan will not grant amnesty or move anyone to the front of the line, said Paul. "But what we have now is de facto amnesty. The solution doesnt have to be amnesty or deportation-a middle ground might be called probation where those who came illegally become legal through a probationary period.





- See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/rand....e528VBhs.dpuf

----------


## TaftFan

Comments need help

----------


## Origanalist

I don't know, I think he's jumping the shark here.

----------


## fisharmor

> “Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers,” said Paul.




Come on, Rand, can you go more than 2 days next time?

----------


## William R

When is the idiot Rand going to realize conservatives will never win a bidding war with Democrats.   In 2016 in a hypothetical debate between Rand and Hillary.   Question. Senator Paul you want to make two classes of citizens.  One that votes and one that works.  What's American about that??  Rand stumbles around and has really no reply.  Hilly answers, elect me and in my first time I'll make voting citizens out of all of them. 

Bottom line  Rand is a lightweight.

----------


## Origanalist

> Come on, Rand, can you go more than 2 days next time?


The guy is riding a wave and then pulls this. Back to square one.

----------


## AlexAmore

He's giving them worker visas, not welfare visas, nor amnesty.

----------


## erowe1

What's the background behind how the word "illegal" became a noun that refers to people who did one particular illegal thing, but not people who do all kinds of other illegal things, like speeding?

----------


## thoughtomator

Back where they came from is a place.

----------


## kathy88

robin • a few seconds ago

Imagine 12 million new Democrat voters, Rand.

----------


## Origanalist

> robin • a few seconds ago
> 
> Imagine 12 million new Democrat voters, Rand.


THAT is my main rub right there. This will make Obama's "change" permanent. (IMO)

----------


## William R

> robin  a few seconds ago
> 
> Imagine 12 million new Democrat voters, Rand.


Actually it'll be between 30 and 50 million over the next 20 years.

----------


## TaftFan

> robin  a few seconds ago
> 
> Imagine 12 million new Democrat voters, Rand.


Visa is not citizenship.

----------


## FSP-Rebel

my comment for the confused over there



> I'm blown away by the lack of intelligence here, perhaps it's reading comprehension skills. There is no amnesty in Sen. Paul's plan. His plan's main focus is instead of deportation and the associated
> police state, to enhance the permanent work visa program to allow these
> people to come out of the shadows and pay taxes but forbids them to vote
> or get any form of welfare, medical care or schooling on the dole.
> Those who don't have visas can't work and would likely self-deport.
> Also, the border security aspect comes from one or more federal agencies
> to say the border is secure and then it's voted on by Congress every
> year up to five years. If and when the border is secure, then the
> process to allow all those that want citizenship status to get at the
> ...

----------


## cero

> my comment for the confused over there


that's some good $#@! rebel will use as copy pasta in the future

----------


## Brett85

I think Rand just figures that there isn't any point in winning the Republican Primary if you can't win a general election, and you're not going to win the general election if you piss of the nation's fastest growing voting block.

----------


## PaulConventionWV

> Back where they came from is a place.


Not going to deport 12 million people... can't.  It's impossible.

----------


## William R

Hey Rand, how about showing compassion for the 24 million unemployed or under employed.

----------


## Origanalist

> I think Rand just figures that there isn't any point in winning the Republican Primary if you can't win a general election, and you're not going to win the general election if you piss of the nation's fastest growing voting block.


Except the nations fastest growing voting block isn't going to vote for smaller government.

----------


## Carlybee

With a worker visa they will be subject to tax but most of them wont pay any because they know how to work the system. They claim enough dependents to fall into a zero tax bracket and then claim the earned income credit...so they get a refund while never actually paying in and they will still qualify for free school breakfasts and lunch for their children. I live in a sanctuary city and I do payroll and human resources so I am not pulling that out of my butt. I know people who do it. So unless exceptions are written into the tax code I wouldnt count on a big influx of revenue.  That being said there are a lot of hard working illegals...theres also a boatload of criminals.

----------


## TaftFan

> my comment for the confused over there


I've been trying but I am half trolling now. They aren't going to learn in the comments.

----------


## Origanalist

> I've been trying but I am half trolling now. They aren't going to learn in the comments.





> Got beat out of a job by an uneducated illegal. You must have been dumb in school


Um ya, I would call that trolling.

----------


## Vastroc

I find the arguments against Rand's plan to be simply ignorant.  All arguments about extra burden on welfare or making it harder for the low income legal people to get to work make no sense.  They are ALREADY HERE doing that now.  Giving them work Visa's will at least make them contribute some taxes to pay for some of the services they are ALREADY using.

This whole "GIVE DEMS MILLIONS OF NEW VOTERS" meme is the strangest of all.  Rand wants to give them WORK VISAS and let them get into the same line as others outside the country get in.  You might as well say you want to shut down the legal immigration into the country because people who are legally immigrating probably are coming from more socially liberal countries.......that legal line that 6.5 Billion people can use is the same one Rand would let illegal immigrants use.

Someone explain to me where I am wrong.

----------


## William R

> I find the arguments against Rand's plan to be simply ignorant.  All arguments about extra burden on welfare or making it harder for the low income legal people to get to work make no sense.  They are ALREADY HERE doing that now.  Giving them work Visa's will at least make them contribute some taxes to pay for some of the services they are ALREADY using.
> 
> This whole "GIVE DEMS MILLIONS OF NEW VOTERS" meme is the strangest of all.  Rand wants to give them WORK VISAS and let them get into the same line as other outside the country get in.  You might as well say you want to shut down the legal immigration into the country because people are legally immigrating probably are probably coming from more socially liberal countries.......that legal line that 6.5 Billion people can use is the same one Rand would let illegal immigrants use.
> 
> Someone explain to me where I am wrong.



We don't need anymore poor unskilled Mexicans.  All they're doing is driving down wages for the working class.  Whether it's in the service industry, construction or agriculture. In parts of the country now  Americans can't find a job in construction because the industry is dominated by illegal Mexicans.  

Teenagers can't find employment because all the jobs they used to do is dominated by illegals. Washing dishes for example.  I could go and on, but mass immigration helps the wealthy at the expense of the middle class.

----------


## cero

> Except the nations fastest growing voting block isn't going to vote for smaller government.


I'm Latin if that matters.

I worked for the census here in California in a very dense Latino community, more than half of them didn't speak any English and were clearly here illegally, and all of them ALL of them had kids.

I know Rand supports this and I understand the reason why he isn't talking about it, but we should not give citizen ship to the kids of illegals. 


is infuriating how we have to pander to this "voting block" that was created artificially by our damn government, by allowing millions to come here Illegally and then giving them and their kids citizenship. 

the issue is complicated but rand is going about the right way.

----------


## TaftFan

> Um ya, I would call that trolling.


Now I'm just calling him Forrest Gump.

----------


## Origanalist

> I find the arguments against Rand's plan to be simply ignorant.  All arguments about extra burden on welfare or making it harder for the low income legal people to get to work make no sense.  They are ALREADY HERE doing that now.  Giving them work Visa's will at least make them contribute some taxes to pay for some of the services they are ALREADY using.
> 
> This whole "GIVE DEMS MILLIONS OF NEW VOTERS" meme is the strangest of all.  Rand wants to give them WORK VISAS and let them get into the same line as others outside the country get in.  You might as well say you want to shut down the legal immigration into the country because people who are legally immigrating probably are coming from more socially liberal countries.......that legal line that 6.5 Billion people can use is the same one Rand would let illegal immigrants use.
> 
> Someone explain to me where I am wrong.


You're not wrong if everything happens as Rand says it will. I'm having a real hard time putting faith in that. I've seen this $#@! go sideways too many times, the best laid plans......This stuff always seems to start out good and by the time it makes it's way through the system it's been bastardized beyond recognition.

----------


## Christian Liberty

> Come on, Rand, can you go more than 2 days next time?


Yeah, I'm a minarchist and not an anarchist, but even still, we're so far out of control right now that I honestly don't want the government to get any more revenue even if its "Fair."  If it was all going to things that maybe should exist but should just be privatized, like schools, roads, and money to the poor, I could maybe see his point, but we're using that money on bombs and bullets too.  Starve the beast.  That said, what is Rand really supposed to say here?  We'll not make them pay taxes?  That's just not likely to happen.  Maybe Rand could try to get our taxes proportionally reduced so that 12 million new taxpayers wouldn't actually increase government revenue.  Which is probably preferable.



> When is the idiot Rand going to realize conservatives will never win a bidding war with Democrats.   In 2016 in a hypothetical debate between Rand and Hillary.   Question. Senator Paul you want to make two classes of citizens.  One that votes and one that works.  What's American about that??  Rand stumbles around and has really no reply.  Hilly answers, elect me and in my first time I'll make voting citizens out of all of them. 
> 
> Bottom line  Rand is a lightweight.


Rand will have an answer.  I may or may not like it, but he'll come up with one.  He's a smart guy.



> What's the background behind how the word "illegal" became a noun that refers to people who did one particular illegal thing, but not people who do all kinds of other illegal things, like speeding?


People who speed aren't illegal immigrants.  I agree that just the word "Illegal" by itself is kind of a poor descriptor.  "Illegal immigrant" is more accurate.  



> robin  a few seconds ago
> 
> Imagine 12 million new Democrat voters, Rand.


I seriously doubt all 12 million will be voting Dem.  Besides, does it matter?  The Democrats have been the lesser evil for probably the last six elections...

----------


## satchelmcqueen

these people are already here and already taking some of our jobs. they get paid cash or have no taxes taken in the first place. so if rand does this, along with a flat sales tax, there is no way they could avoid paying tax. plan works. government is all about money. i think he may have gained a lot of support here from some on the inside.

it also would do away with the irs.

----------


## LibertyEagle

Rand on Facebook:






> Thanks to everyone who attended this morning's Latino Faith and Immigration Forum, where I discussed how *border security is crucial to any meaningful immigration reform*.

----------


## erowe1

> People who speed aren't illegal immigrants.


Right. They're illegal fast drivers.

----------


## Brett85

> Except the nations fastest growing voting block isn't going to vote for smaller government.


And if it stays like that the Republican Party will be a permanent minority.  Rand is trying to win them over to small government principles by making it clear that he's not hostile to them.  That's just his starting point to get them to listen to him.

----------


## Origanalist

> And if it stays like that the Republican Party will be a permanent minority.  Rand is trying to win them over to small government principles by making it clear that he's not hostile to them.  That's just his starting point to get them to listen to him.


Well, this is going to happen regardless. I'll take his stance over Rubio and the gang of eight's any day. And just hope you're right about him winning them over, color me skeptical.

----------


## erowe1

> these people are already here and already taking some of our jobs. they get paid cash or have no taxes taken in the first place. so if rand does this, along with a flat sales tax, there is no way they could avoid paying tax. plan works. government is all about money. i think he may have gained a lot of support here from some on the inside.
> 
> it also would do away with the irs.


I don't think Rand supports a sales tax.

But if he did, I don't think a sales tax means there's no way to avoid paying taxes. There would be plenty of easy ways to do that. A whole new industry of permanent garage sales would probably emerge.

And if it really were the case that a sales tax would make it impossible to avoid taxes, that would be a bad thing.

----------


## Vastroc

> We don't need anymore poor unskilled Mexicans.  All they're doing is driving down wages for the working class.  Whether it's in the service industry, construction or agriculture. In parts of the country now  Americans can't find a job in construction because the industry is dominated by illegal Mexicans.  
> 
> Teenagers can't find employment because all the jobs they used to do is dominated by illegals. Washing dishes for example.  I could go and on, but mass immigration helps the wealthy at the expense of the middle class.


You seem to have ignored the content of my post entirely.  Once again, they are already here doing all these things so your entire argument against Rand's plan makes Zero sense whatsoever.

My entire family were Legal Immigrants into this country a few decades ago.  They worked picking crops the first few years they were here.  Now every single one are middle-upper class who own multiple businesses/homes/farms with children who are engineers/doctors/lawyers or business owners themselves.

My mom owned a small grocery store before she retired.  Over the course of 22 years, she had 19 employees.  Of those 8 (2 Black and 6 white) were natural born Americans and 12+ were immigrants.

2 Americans stole from the store (money orders) and were arrested.  3 Americans were too dumb/lazy to keep up with half the work my 50+ year old mother with 2 back surgeries was doing and had to be fired.  2 quit after less than a month.  1 lasted about 4 months before she disappeared without a word (we called police...were worried about her) and apparently popped up a few months later in another state.

Of the 11 immigrants.....9 were working a second shift somewhere else and 2 were going to school at the same time.  The 2 going to school became engineers (both earning 100k+ now) and 8 of the 9 became business owners themselves (last guy was still working at the store when my mom sold it).

I have literally seen this play out 100 different times in my community.  Guy comes in with nothing and works his ass off in low paying jobs and 25 years later he is a home/business owner with kids in University.

----------


## torchbearer

how about people worry about who they allow and don't allow on their own property, and stop trying to tell me who i can have on mine.
$#@! off.

----------


## PSYOP

ehhhh

----------


## jtstellar

> I don't know, I think he's jumping the shark here.


where the hell you been..?  he has been clarifying for centuries this is work visa he is talking about, 'finding a place' means more like a work place if they want to work, not citizenship.  he clarified for months now he doesn't support a shortcut for them to get citizenship

he has had the same position for months you just hearing this for the first time or what, or you decide to suddenly burst on the scene with this?  you got amnesia or something?




> When is the idiot Rand going to realize conservatives will never win a bidding war with Democrats.   In 2016 in a hypothetical debate between Rand and Hillary.   Question. Senator Paul you want to make two classes of citizens.  One that votes and one that works.  What's American about that??  Rand stumbles around and has really no reply.  Hilly answers, elect me and in my first time I'll make voting citizens out of all of them. 
> 
> Bottom line  Rand is a lightweight.


for you too, moron.

----------


## William R

> You seem to have ignored the content of my post entirely.  Once again, they are already here doing all these things so your entire argument against Rand's plan makes Zero sense whatsoever.
> 
> My entire family were Legal Immigrants into this country a few decades ago.  They worked picking crops the first few years they were here.  Now every single one are middle-upper class who own multiple businesses/homes/farms with children who are engineers/doctors/lawyers or business owners themselves.
> 
> My mom owned a small grocery store before she retired.  Over the course of 22 years, she had 19 employees.  Of those 8 (2 Black and 6 white) were natural born Americans and 12+ were immigrants.
> 
> 2 Americans stole from the store (money orders) and were arrested.  3 Americans were too dumb/lazy to keep up with half the work my 50+ year old mother with 2 back surgeries was doing and had to be fired.  2 quit after less than a month.  1 lasted about 4 months before she disappeared without a word (we called police...were worried about her) and apparently popped up a few months later in another state.
> 
> Of the 11 immigrants.....9 were working a second shift somewhere else and 2 were going to school at the same time.  The 2 going to school became engineers (both earning 100k+ now) and 8 of the 9 became business owners themselves (last guy was still working at the store when my mom sold it).
> ...


They're here illegally.   Enforce the laws on the books.  Rand's plan is trash.  It rewards law breakers.   There is no other way to sugar coated it.

----------


## fisharmor

> Yeah, I'm a minarchist and not an anarchist


Yeah, I was too until I was into my 30's.  We'll welcome you when you get here.



> but  even still, we're so far out of control right now that I honestly don't  want the government to get any more revenue even if its "Fair."


FFS, why is it that only *THREE PEOPLE IN THIS THREAD*  have shown evidence they understand what the problem with Rand's plan  is?
Thank you, FF, for getting it.

----------


## fisharmor

> They're here illegally.   Enforce the laws on  the books.  Rand's plan is trash.  It rewards law breakers.   There is  no other way to sugar coated it.


Sigh.........................................

One more time, everyone:
Please show the part of the US constitution which gives the federal government the power to define citizenship.
Please show the part of the US constitution which gives the federal government the power to control entry to and egress from the country.
Please  show the part of the US constitution which gives the federal government  the power to deport people for any reason whatsoever.

In other words, please show how the "laws on the books" are legal.

----------


## William R

> Sigh.........................................
> 
> One more time, everyone:
> Please show the part of the US constitution which gives the federal government the power to define citizenship.
> Please show the part of the US constitution which gives the federal government the power to control entry to and egress from the country.
> Please  show the part of the US constitution which gives the federal government  the power to deport people for any reason whatsoever.
> 
> In other words, please show how the "laws on the books" are legal.


Go back to your comic books

----------


## Vastroc

> They're here illegally.   Enforce the laws on the books.  Rand's plan is trash.  It rewards law breakers.   There is no other way to sugar coated it.


Nice.....least you dropped your totally debunked earlier arguments.  This is actually true....they are here illegally. They should pay a fine/do some community service (don't think its a felony).

As far as mass deportation goes....I can just see it now.  1 million pictures like the famous Elian Gonzales (SP?) hiding in a closet as a swat team storms their homes.  Its not going to happen.

----------


## fisharmor

> Go back to your comic books


They are much more realistic than a constitutionalist's adherence to the constitution.....
Guess what: if you can't find it, it's not there.

----------


## Brett85

> Sigh.........................................
> 
> One more time, everyone:
> Please show the part of the US constitution which gives the federal government the power to define citizenship.
> Please show the part of the US constitution which gives the federal government the power to control entry to and egress from the country.
> Please  show the part of the US constitution which gives the federal government  the power to deport people for any reason whatsoever.
> 
> In other words, please show how the "laws on the books" are legal.


The Congress shall have Power To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.
The Congress shall have Power To suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.
The Congress shall have Power To provide for the common defense.

----------


## AuH20

Rand Paul is simply politicking to the hispanic voting bloc. Nothing to see here. I bet he would never sign a blanket amnesty bill as the chief exec.

----------


## Southron

> how about people worry about who they allow and don't allow on their own property, and stop trying to tell me who i can have on mine.
> $#@! off.


The people on your property are voting away my property. Thanks.

----------


## erowe1

> They're here illegally.   Enforce the laws on the books.  Rand's plan is trash.  It rewards law breakers.   There is no other way to sugar coated it.


Rosa Parks was a law breaker.

And what laws on the books do you want enforced? The ones telling you who you can and can't hire to work for you?

----------


## torchbearer

> The people on your property are voting away my property. Thanks.


if you got a problem with everyone voting, fix that.
i'd support either a property voting system, or taxes paid in weighted voting system.
the more taxes you pay in, the more shares you have.
but if you dare $#@! with my property or my rights, you've crossed the line.

----------


## AuH20

> if you got a problem with everyone voting, fix that.
> i'd support either a property voting system, or taxes paid in weighted voting system.
> the more taxes you pay in, the more shares you have.
> but if you dare $#@! with my property or my rights, you've crossed the line.


Let's fight against the revolting concept of "public property" as Hoppe described and then we can start defending your private property rights. Until then, the game will continue.

----------


## AuH20

> if you got a problem with everyone voting, fix that.
> i'd support either a property voting system, or taxes paid in weighted voting system.
> the more taxes you pay in, the more shares you have.
> but if you dare $#@! with my property or my rights, you've crossed the line.


Let's fight against the revolting concept of "public property" as Hoppe described and then we can start defending your private property rights. Until then, the game will continue.

----------


## fisharmor

> The Congress shall have Power To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.
> The Congress shall have Power To suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.
> The Congress shall have Power To provide for the common defense.


And we've been over this before.
Words have meanings.  If the word "invasion" means "people who want to cut grass for a substandard wage", then the word "militia" means "regular military forces blessed by congress", the word "among" means "anywhere we damn well please", the word "secure" means "infantacide", and the word "constitution" means "this is precisely why I'm no longer one of you, because if the people who are supposedly championing the constitution are deliberately bending its meaning in precisely the same manner as the living document crowd simply to continue persecuting brown people then I want exactly nothing to do with it".

Naturalization = the process of becoming a citizen.  Nothing more, nothing less.

Invasion = an influx of people intent on doing harm.  Moreover, you deliberately left out the fact that congress only has the power to call forth the militia to repel invasions... so even if it is an invasion, and it's not, then you have no point.

----------


## torchbearer

> Let's fight against the revolting concept of "public property" as Hoppe described and then we can start defending your private property rights. Until then, the game will continue.


the game stops at my property line.
the fact that some people don't understand that concept won't excuse them from the consequences.
you want your rights and property respected, how about showing some to others?

----------


## Brett85

> Naturalization = the process of becoming a citizen.  Nothing more, nothing less.


Then doesn't that also give Congress the authority to determine what the process of becoming a citizen should be for those who are here illegally?  I don't really see how anyone can argue that Congress doesn't have jurisdiction over immigration in the Constitution when they have the power of determining citizenship.

----------


## Brett85

> And we've been over this before.
> Words have meanings.  If the word "invasion" means "people who want to cut grass for a substandard wage", then the word "militia" means "regular military forces blessed by congress", the word "among" means "anywhere we damn well please", the word "secure" means "infantacide", and the word "constitution" means "this is precisely why I'm no longer one of you, because if the people who are supposedly championing the constitution are deliberately bending its meaning in precisely the same manner as the living document crowd simply to continue persecuting brown people then I want exactly nothing to do with it".


So basically, if the Constitution doesn't specifically say, "Congress shall have the power to secure the borders," then it's your view that Congress doesn't have that power since those exact words aren't used?

----------


## Brett85

And what exactly does this have to do with "brown people?"  I'm in favor of securing the border between us and Canada as well.  I don't think there's very many "brown people" coming down from Canada.

----------


## erowe1

> So basically, if the Constitution doesn't specifically say, "Congress shall have the power to secure the borders," then it's your view that Congress doesn't have that power since those exact words aren't used?


A problem with what you're asking is that "secure the borders" is pretty abstract. What does it include? Does it include making everyone prove they belong here with some government approved piece of paper and deporting anyone who can't do that, or prohibiting them from getting jobs here? If so, I have a hard time seeing anything in the Constitution that includes that.

----------


## Origanalist

> Rand on Facebook:
> 
> Thanks to everyone who attended this morning's Latino Faith and Immigration Forum, where I discussed how border security is crucial to any meaningful immigration reform.


Reid Blocks Senate Vote on Border Security Amendment to Immigration Bill
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...migration-Bill

----------


## torchbearer

> And what exactly does this have to do with "brown people?"  I'm in favor of securing the border between us and Canada as well.  I don't think there's very many "brown people" coming down from Canada.


do you believe you have right over another man's business? you have right to tell him who he hires?
do you believe you have right over a land lords property? you have a right to tell him who he keeps?
where do you get this right over others' property? might i also use it to encroach upon yours?

----------


## Brett85

> do you believe you have right over another man's business? you have right to tell him who he hires?
> do you believe you have right over a land lords property? you have a right to tell him who he keeps?
> where do you get this right over others' property? might i also use it to encroach upon yours?


I thought we were discussing border security, not E-Verify.  Border security is essential to preserving the property rights of those who live along the border area, because there's an epedemic of people who live along the border getting killed by people crossing the border illegally.

----------


## Brett85

> A problem with what you're asking is that "secure the borders" is pretty abstract. What does it include? Does it include making everyone prove they belong here with some government approved piece of paper and deporting anyone who can't do that, or prohibiting them from getting jobs here? If so, I have a hard time seeing anything in the Constitution that includes that.


It just includes making sure that people don't cross the borders unless they've done all of their paperwork and have gone through a background check so we can make sure they're coming here for the right reasons.

----------


## supermario21

Rubio on O'Reilly now talking about NSA and immigration. Gosh he is such a terrible speaker.

----------


## juleswin

> robin  a few seconds ago
> 
> Imagine 12 million new Democrat voters, Rand.


You cannot vote with a work visa, green card or student visa. At least your are not supposed to but some people do it anyway. Just like they are voting right now as illegals. I will keep waiting for a national politician, any politician for that matter to come out in favor of complete deportation. Until then, you find a solution that will work.

Also the strawberries are not going to pick itself.

----------


## erowe1

> It just includes making sure that people don't cross the borders unless they've done all of their paperwork and have gone through a background check so we can make sure they're coming here for the right reasons.


Doesn't this have to include some way of punishing people who do cross the border without all that paperwork? Or is the idea that the government can do something that would just make it impossible for anyone to pull that off in the first place?

----------


## Origanalist

> You cannot vote with a work visa, green card or student visa. At least your are not supposed to but some people do it anyway. Just like they are voting right now as illegals. I will keep waiting for a national politician, any politician for that matter to come out in favor of complete deportation. Until then, you find a solution that will work.
> 
> Also the strawberries are not going to pick itself.


I'm not in favor of complete deportation, I think the idea is ridiculous. However, I am for strong enforcement of voting laws.

----------


## Brett85

> Doesn't this have to include some way of punishing people who do cross the border without all that paperwork? Or is the idea that the government can do something that would just make it impossible for anyone to pull that off in the first place?


A lot of them would probably leave voluntarily if we cut off all of their welfare benefits.  Those who have crossed the border illegally recently should be deported in my opinion.  Those who have been here illegally a long time should probably be allowed to apply for a Work Visa and stay here and work, as long as they first pay a fine and face some other penalties.

----------


## erowe1

> Those who have crossed the border illegally recently should be deported in my opinion.


Doesn't this mean I have to prove I'm not one of those people in order not to get deported?

----------


## Brett85

> Doesn't this mean I have to prove I'm not one of those people in order not to get deported?


Would it be a gross violation of your rights to show your driver's license if you were suspected of being here illegally?  It wouldn't take anything more intrusive than that to determine if someone is here illegally.  I definitely don't support a National ID card or anything like that.

----------


## erowe1

> Would it be a gross violation of your rights to show your driver's license if you were suspected of being here illegally?  It wouldn't take anything more intrusive than that to determine if someone is here illegally.  I definitely don't support a National ID card or anything like that.


Yes, it would be. I shouldn't have to get a drivers license as a prerequisite of not getting deported. And where would the government get the right to deport me if I didn't get one?

----------


## Brett85

> Yes, it would be. I shouldn't have to get a drivers license as a prerequisite of not getting deported. And where would the government get the right to deport me if I didn't get one?


If you're an American citizen you're not going to get deported.  That should be obvious.  It's easy to prove that you're a citizen.  The government has the right to defend our country as mandated by the Constitution.  Border security is the most important aspect of national security when you consider that most terrorists come into our country illegally.  That was the case on 9-11.  Keeping them from coming here is a much better option than "fighting them over there."

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

This issue is insanely easy to hit a populist homerun with.

Not only can you be for legalizing the currently illegal population of immigrants, but you can then say "hey, working people, I want to give you the same tax rate those working under the table currently have." Tie it in with opposing additional burdensome regulations on business, and this can be an absolute, no-brainer slam dunk.

Grow a pair and get radical, Rand. You just might find a greater level of deep support at the end of that tunnel.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> Let's fight against the revolting concept of "public property" as Hoppe described and then we can start defending your private property rights. Until then, the game will continue.


If you support the government's ability to deport people, you're supporting the revolting concept of public property.

----------


## The Free Hornet

> Let's fight against the revolting concept of "public property" as Hoppe described *and then we can start* defending your private property rights. Until then, the game will continue.


This again?  Why must we defend freedom in the order you deem necessary???

----------


## fr33

Amnesty is the liberty position. Too bad Rand won't use his platform to explain and support it.

This is a country that has lost it's own history.

A large influx of immigrants = economic boom to a civilization that has brains.

----------


## AuH20

> This again?  Why must we defend freedom in the order you deem necessary???


A generous welfare state and an open borders state cannot co-exist. That's a fact. It's either one or the other.

----------


## fr33

> *We don't need anymore poor unskilled Mexicans.* 
> 
> All they're doing is driving down wages for the working class.  Whether it's in the service industry, construction or agriculture. In parts of the country now  Americans can't find a job in construction because the industry is dominated by illegal Mexicans.  
> 
> Teenagers can't find employment because all the jobs they used to do is dominated by illegals. Washing dishes for example.  I could go and on, but mass immigration helps the wealthy at the expense of the middle class.


If you are going to use the noun, we, then I'm going to play along.

You and your kids don't want to work physical labor jobs. You are so lazy that you not only voted to give welfare to citizens, you voted to give it to non-citizens. You will never work those jobs.

----------


## William R

> Nice.....least you dropped your totally debunked earlier arguments.  This is actually true....they are here illegally. They should pay a fine/do some community service (don't think its a felony).
> 
> As far as mass deportation goes....I can just see it now.  1 million pictures like the famous Elian Gonzales (SP?) hiding in a closet as a swat team storms their homes.  Its not going to happen.



Kid, you didn't debunk $#@!.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> When is the idiot Rand going to realize conservatives will never win a bidding war with Democrats.   In 2016 in a hypothetical debate between Rand and Hillary.   Question. Senator Paul you want to make two classes of citizens.  One that votes and one that works.  What's American about that??  Rand stumbles around and has really no reply.  Hilly answers, elect me and in my first time I'll make voting citizens out of all of them.


Yeah, the idea of a formalized, institutionalized class system just doesn't feel right.

----------


## William R

> If you are going to use the noun, we, then I'm going to play along.
> 
> You and your kids don't want to work physical labor jobs. You are so lazy that you not only voted to give welfare to citizens, you voted to give it to non-citizens. You will never work those jobs.



Kid, have you ever heard of a thing called a labor market.   Not a global labor market.  But a true Free market in labor.  One where American citizens play by the rules of law our elected officials put on them.  I'm not worried about employing people from a foreign country. Mexico for example.  The free movement of goods and services across borders in great.  The movement of people across borders while we have public schools, public hospitals, birthright citizenship etc etc.  Face it kid, you're not small government libertarian conservative.   You want to feed the  beast kid.   Give the beast more poor unskilled people.  You're a joke.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> But a true Free market in labor.  One where American citizens play by the rules of law our elected officials put on them.


lolwut

----------


## William R

> Amnesty is the liberty position. Too bad Rand won't use his platform to explain and support it.
> 
> This is a country that has lost it's own history.
> 
> A large influx of immigrants = economic boom to a civilization that has brains.



Mass immigration was fine before we had a welfare state.  You're an embarrassing joke.

----------


## William R

> lolwut


 No response.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> No response.


You're right, there is no response to the assertion that a government mandated system is a free market. That's beyond backwards.

----------


## HigherVision

It's gonna make it harder for small government candidates to get elected, that's all I'm saying.

----------


## fisharmor

> So basically, if the  Constitution doesn't specifically say, "Congress shall have the power to  secure the borders," then it's your view that Congress doesn't have  that power since those exact words aren't used?


Is it your view that PRISM is OK because the constitution doesn't specifically say "no collecting phone conversations"?
The meaning of the 10th Amendment is clearer than just about every other provision in the constitution.
If  it doesn't explicitly give the federal government the power to secure  the borders, then there exists no power to secure the borders.

Do you realize that immigration was controlled by the states - or not at all - for over 100 years in this country?
Don't you find it interesting that the INS was originally under the Treasury department?
Don't you find it the least bit suspicious that  the federal power grab over immigration happened after the 1861-65 war,  and just about the same time progressivism was pushing for prohibition,  the central bank, the destruction of the 17th amendment, and the big push for socialism here?
Do you realize that INS was created under *FDR* of all people?

Have you ever actually read the text of _The New Colossus_?

Face it... immigration control is a progressive, socialist institution and without a doubt the most anti-liberty facet of our beloved leader's platform.
Lest I be thought of as one of the "haters", this is a case where Rand got something *right*.  Or at least close to it.

----------


## erowe1

> If you're an American citizen you're not going to get deported.  That should be obvious.  It's easy to prove that you're a citizen.


How am I supposed to prove I'm a citizen?

----------


## fisharmor

> Mass immigration was fine before we had a welfare state.  You're an embarrassing joke.


First of all, I'm calling you out.  Get an actual argument and stop with the ad hominem.  If you can't handle the fact that it's stacking up against you, concede, or leave.

Secondly,  I guess this response means you're in favor of the welfare state,  then?  There's no other way to read this, because no matter how hard you  want them to, two wrongs don't make a right.

----------


## fisharmor

> How am I supposed to prove I'm a citizen?

----------


## LibertyEagle

Look folks.  As long as the welfare state exists, it is akin to sticking your neck in a noose to want amnesty yet again.  

And Torch, as long as you want to bear the responsibility, both financially and legally, for the illegal aliens that you claim you have a right to on your own property, I have no issue with that.

----------


## fisharmor

> Look folks.  As long as the welfare state  exists, it is akin to sticking your neck in a noose to want amnesty yet  again.


I'd like to know what the reasoning is behind this.  This is what I figure....  either:

1)  If there's an amnesty and "illegals" can stay here without persecution,  then people like my Guatemalan friend - an IT professional with an accounting degree - might stop working construction at some point.
He  would get a better job and get out of a position where he might  eventually need welfare.  And he would be paying more taxes into the  welfare state to be used on those who didn't get better jobs.

Or, 

2)  He won't get a better job, and he'll eventually need welfare, along  with all the other 20 million immigrants.  In which case the system will  crash.  Which can only be a good thing, because - _supposing those  involved aren't terrified of speaking in public_ - we can evangelize  to _them_ and explain to them that this system is hopelessly broken  and needs to be replaced or, ideally, abolished.  They _all_ grew  up going to church, so they are well familiar with leaning on families  or non-state social institutions for a leg up.

----------


## Brett85

> Is it your view that PRISM is OK because the constitution doesn't specifically say "no collecting phone conversations"?


PRISM is unconstitutional because it violates the 4th amendment.

----------


## JCDenton0451

> Mass immigration was fine before we had a welfare state.  You're an embarrassing joke.


 They call it "stupid party" for a reason. Even within the liberty movement, from the people who think that evolution is marxist propaganda to the people convinced, that the semi-illiterate fruitpickers from Mexico will unleash the next economic boom, there is no shortage of stupid in the liberty movement.

----------


## Brett85

> How am I supposed to prove I'm a citizen?


I don't know.  Is there some kind of mass problem in our country with U.S citizens constantly being asked to prove that they're citizens to avoid getting deported?  It seems as though you're making a straw man argument.  I haven't seen any evidence that U.S citizens are somehow getting deported to foreign countries.

----------


## Brett85

> Lest I be thought of as one of the "haters", this is a case where Rand got something *right*.  Or at least close to it.


Um, my position on this issue is much closer to Rand's than to yours.  I've been defending Rand's position on this issue.  Rand is one of the few politicians in Washington DC who actually has a plan to secure our nation's borders.

----------


## erowe1

> I don't know.  Is there some kind of mass problem in our country with U.S citizens constantly being asked to prove that they're citizens to avoid getting deported?  It seems as though you're making a straw man argument.  I haven't seen any evidence that U.S citizens are somehow getting deported to foreign countries.


Deportation has so far not been the main disincentive for illegal immigration. Instead, the regime does its main enforcement at the place of employment. All of us have to prove we're citizens in order to be allowed to have jobs. This involves giving our employers all kinds of information about ourselves, and them giving that to the government. This includes the use of unique Social Security numbers to identify each of us. Yes, this problem is widespread to the point of being the accepted norm.

----------


## Brett85

> Deportation has so far not been the main disincentive for illegal immigration. Instead, the regime does its main enforcement at the place of employment. All of us have to prove we're citizens in order to be allowed to have jobs. This involves giving our employers all kinds of information about ourselves, and them giving that to the government. This includes the use of unique Social Security numbers to identify each of us. Yes, this problem is widespread to the point of being the accepted norm.


I'm not in favor of a nationwide E-Verify system.  A better alternative would be to cut off all welfare benefits for illegal immigrants which would cause many of them to leave voluntarily.

----------


## JCDenton0451

> I'm not in favor of a nationwide E-Verify system.  A better alternative would be to cut off all welfare benefits for illegal immigrants which would cause many of them to leave voluntarily.


You support welfare benefits for _legal_ immigrants? What's the point of immigrant welfare anyway? These people came here to work, at least that's what they say.

----------


## erowe1

> I'm not in favor of a nationwide E-Verify system.  A better alternative would be to cut off all welfare benefits for illegal immigrants which would cause many of them to leave voluntarily.


I would be for that.

But earlier you mentioned deporting some of them, and I'm still wondering how you do that without some hoop the rest of us have to jump through to earn the government's approval for us to stay here.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> I'd like to know what the reasoning is behind this.  This is what I figure....  either:
> 
> 1)  If there's an amnesty and "illegals" can stay here without persecution,  then people like my Guatemalan friend - an IT professional with an accounting degree - might stop working construction at some point.
> He  would get a better job and get out of a position where he might  eventually need welfare.  And he would be paying more taxes into the  welfare state to be used on those who didn't get better jobs.


Question.  Why must he be given citizenship?  I have no issue with worker visas.




> Or, 
> 
> 2)  He won't get a better job, and he'll eventually need welfare, along  with all the other 20 million immigrants.  In which case the system will  crash.  Which can only be a good thing, because - _supposing those  involved aren't terrified of speaking in public_ - we can evangelize  to _them_ and explain to them that this system is hopelessly broken  and needs to be replaced or, ideally, abolished.  They _all_ grew  up going to church, so they are well familiar with leaning on families  or non-state social institutions for a leg up.


That sounds like blackmail.  Why would I owe him anything out of my pocket?  There should be no welfare at all, much less for people who illegally entered our country.

----------


## erowe1

> Question.  Why must he be given citizenship?  I have no issue with worker visas.


I don't think they should get either one. Just let them stay here and work wherever they get hired without the government knowing anything about who, where, or how many they are.

----------


## Origanalist

> You support welfare benefits for _legal_ immigrants? What's the point of immigrant welfare anyway? These people came here to work, at least that's what they say.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> I don't think they should get either one. Just let them stay here and work wherever they get hired without the government knowing anything about who, where, or how many they are.


How would that work while the welfare state is in place, erowe?  Wouldn't this also give preference to illegal aliens being hired over Americans, because they wouldn't have to pay for SS and all the rest?

----------


## JCDenton0451

Yes, I know, *Origanalist*.

Perhaps, you should email this graph to Rand Paul so that our guy could educate himself on Hispanic immigration.

----------


## erowe1

> How would that work while the welfare state is in place, erowe?  Wouldn't this also give preference to illegal aliens being hired over Americans, because they wouldn't have to pay for SS and all the rest?


Why would Americans have to pay for those things if illegal immigrants don't? There would have to be some way of distinguishing them from one another.

----------


## Origanalist

> Yes, I know, *Origanalist*.
> 
> Perhaps, you should email this graph to Rand Paul so that our guy could educate himself on Hispanic immigration.


Lol, why did you link my name?

----------


## Origanalist

> Why would Americans have to pay for those things if illegal immigrants don't? There would have to be some way of distinguishing them from one another.


I must be dense, but I don't understand that post.

----------


## erowe1

> I must be dense, but I don't understand that post.


That post was me not understanding LE's post.

I don't see how the government would distinguish Americans from illegal immigrants so that they could make the former pay SSI and let the latter work without doing that.

Going back to what I said that she was replying to before that. If the government just left illegal immigrants alone and had no idea who, where, or how many they were, including where they were working, then they necessarily wouldn't know anything about the rest of us either. And even if they did, we could just all declare ourselves illegal immigrants and enjoy our new freedom.

----------


## JCDenton0451

> Lol, why did you link my name?


I simply copied  and pasted it, faster than typing it.

----------


## Origanalist

> I simply copied  and pasted it, faster than typing it.


Probably easier considering the goofy spelling.

----------


## Origanalist

> That post was me not understanding LE's post.
> 
> I don't see how the government would distinguish Americans from illegal immigrants so that they could make the former pay SSI and let the latter work without doing that.
> 
> Going back to what I said that she was replying to before that. If the government just left illegal immigrants alone and had no idea who, where, or how many they were, including where they were working, then they necessarily wouldn't know anything about the rest of us either. And even if they did, we could just all declare ourselves illegal immigrants and enjoy our new freedom.


It's a nice fantasy.......

----------


## erowe1

> It's a nice fantasy.......


I don't expect it to happen either. But I'd rather call it an ideal than a fantasy. It's an ideal that can guide our policy positions where we can support movements toward that ideal and oppose movements away from it.

----------


## Origanalist

> I don't expect it to happen either. But I'd rather call it an ideal than a fantasy. It's an ideal that can guide our policy positions where we can support movements toward that ideal and oppose movements away from it.


Ok, I like that.

----------


## fisharmor

> PRISM is unconstitutional because it violates the 4th amendment.


Then if you're so strict with the 4th amendment, why are you loose with the 10th?

----------


## fisharmor

> Question.  Why must he be given citizenship?  I have no issue with worker visas.


Why does citizenship keep entering the conversation?
The  main problem with immigration reform is that everyone acts like there  are only two options: either round them all up and ship them out, or  turn them all into citizens.
I don't support giving my friend citizenship, except as part of a naturalization process.
I'm pretty sure it's not on his radar, either.
What  I DO want is for his psychobitch raving lunatic ex-wife not to be able  to lord it over him and threaten to call Homeland Security and make it  so he can never see his son again.
Whether or not he's ever able to  vote isn't on his radar right now - in fact, he only became illegal  because his fairly good life turned into flaming wreckage in the space  of a month and renewing his visa wasn't on his radar.

I also  don't care if he ever becomes a citizen.  But there's a third way: stop  the persecution, and just stop giving a $#@! whether non-citizens live  in this country.
If they murder someone, then treat them like murderers.
If they beg for change, then treat them like beggars.
If they defraud the system, then treat them like fraudsters.

Why does citizenship have to enter into that equation at all?




> How would that work while the welfare state is in place, erowe?  Wouldn't this also give preference to illegal aliens being hired over Americans, because they wouldn't have to pay for SS and all the rest?


Two wrongs don't make a right.

----------


## Origanalist

> If they beg for change, then treat them like beggars.


Except I never see any of them begging, that seems to be a uniquely American trait.  (in this country anyway)

----------


## libertarian101

Rand Paul position on immigration issue and abortion is very naive and stupid. His position on abortion is unnecessarily too far right for presidential candidate and he has much much to lose than to gain in not supporting abortion in case of rape and incest. He will lose many independent and young people votes and will never become president with that position.
On immigration, I’m not against him playing the game if he ended up voting against path way to citizenships but if he votes for it, he is committing political suicide. Forget about the presidency but he will more likely lose his senate seat. His fiscal conservative credential will be challenged for supporting 6 trillion spending on illegal immigrant while planning to cut Americans benefit.   Some war monger will primary him by running add saying he lied to voters when he run for the senate in 2010, promising no amnesty and underground electric fence and so on . Even neocons are advising Rubio not to vote for immigration bill. I really hope Rand gets his head right and vote like Mike lee and Ted Cruz.

----------


## fr33

Stormfront is missing one of it's regulars.



Next he'll say that Africans have an extra muscle and that's how come they are so good at sports.

----------


## Origanalist

> Stormfront is missing one of it's regulars.
> 
> 
> 
> Next he'll say that Africans have an extra muscle and that's how come they are so good at sports.

----------

