John Edwards is going to help stop amnesty

Imagine what would happen if an amnesty supporter were forced to endure an hour-long, nationally-televised interview just about immigration matters where they were asked a series of tough questions about amnesty and forced to defend what they support.

As long as the questions were tough enough, and they were asked follow-up after follow-up, their lies and misleading statements would be revealed. That would almost certainly result in them losing a great deal of credibility and it would almost certainly have a significant impact on their political careers.

And, that would go a long way towards ending any chance of amnesty, as all the other supporters realize that their arguments could similarly be exposed and they would lose credibility as well.

So, how do we get something like that? The mainstream media is definitely part of the problem: they're completely corrupt and instead of trying to expose the lies by asking tough questions, they work to cover up the lies that politicians tell.

But, there is a way to do an end-around, and I urge everyone who wants to prevent amnesty to take part:

1. Choose a politician who supports amnesty, then go to their public appearances and ask them one or more very tough questions designed to reveal exactly how they're wrong and forcing them to defend what they support.

2. Publicize their answers (via Youtube, blogs, forums, press releases, Digg, Reddit, etc. etc.)

3. Repeat the first two until the politician loses credibility and support.

While you can choose others, I'm recommending concentrating on John Edwards, with Bill Richardson a possibility as well. While Edwards has "concerns about parts of the [latest Senate bill]", he supports amnesty in general. Richardson doesn't appear to have spoken out about the Senate bill, but he too supports amnesty in general. We might force John Edwards to come out whole-heartedly against the Senate scheme, but at the least we'll sharply reduce the credibility of those who support any form of amnesty. You can find Edwards' campaign schedule here, and Richardson's is here.

Here are a few questions to start with:

"Senator Edwards: you've falsely claimed that there are only three options to deal with illegal immigration: the status quo, massive legalization, or massive deportations (listen). You forgot to mention a fourth choice: simply enforcing the current laws and thereby encouraging many illegal aliens to leave voluntarily over time. That would also reduce future illegal immigration. Do you agree that it's misleading to omit that fourth choice? Why didn't you push for the fourth choice when you were in the Senate? In 2003, just four (4!) companies were fined for immigration violations. Why weren't you pushing the Bush administration to enforce the laws when you were in the Senate, in order to help avoid the current situation?"

"Senator Edwards: no matter what it's called, won't millions and millions of people around the world see any form of 'comprehensive immigration reform' as an amnesty, and won't they try to come here to take part in that amnesty or in future amnesties? And, doesn't the federal government's failure to enforce the laws over the past decades strongly indicate that any provisions designed to keep those new prospective illegal aliens from coming here will not be enforced or will be watered down?"

"Senator Edwards: you voted for the DREAM Act (link), which is also part of the latest Senate amnesty bill. In addition to being an amnesty of its own, that Act lets illegal aliens attend college at the in-state rate. Since there are only a finite number of college discounts available, every discount that goes to an illegal alien is one that is taken away from a U.S. citizen. I would like you to tell us exactly what you would say to a U.S. citizen who can't go to college because of the legislation you supported. Please bear in mind that, once again, there are only so many discounts available, and every one that goes to an illegal alien deprives a U.S. citizen of a discount."

Feel free to offer your own questions in comments, and please leave links in this or future posts if you go out and ask him some tough questions.

UPDATE: Here's another one:

"Senator Edwards: In Congressional testimony, Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation estimated (quote) 'that if all the current adult illegal immigrants in the U.S. were granted amnesty the net retirement costs to government (benefits minus taxes) could be over $2.5 trillion.' You might disagree on that estimate, or you might not. But, could you give us a ballpark figure as to the net cost of legalization that you would consider too high? Do you consider a net cost of $1 trillion too high? $2 trillion? $3 trillion? Please give us a ballpark figure, bearing in mind that we're discussing the net cost.

UPDATE 2: The positions of various candidates are given here, including this:

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson also praised the immigration bill... "This legislation makes a good start toward re-securing our southern border," Richardson said Friday... But, like other Democratic candidates, he expressed concern about a temporary worker program and rules governing family unification.



Thank you for this informative, heroic site. Keep up the amazing work.

How to help stop Illegal Immigration by Boycotting American Strawberries in 2007 Yesterday Fox News reported that our nationÂ’s agricultural industry was facing a manpower shortage because there werenÂ’t enough illegal immigrants to pick the produce. Shepherd Smith said that some of the crops could rot in the fields, and then the broadcast interviewed a strawberry farmer who said we actually needed more immigrants or that his crop wouldnÂ’t get harvested. More illegal immigrants? Just how come there arenÂ’t enough illegal immigrants? We already have 12 million to 23 million illegal immigrants in this country, so where are they when you need them? IÂ’ll tell you where they are. TheyÂ’re not picking our crops because theyÂ’ve gone after higher paying jobs in construction and elsewhere. And now weÂ’re supposed to allow another big flood of illegals in the country to save the profits of our strawberry farmers!!! The agricultural industry created this illegal immigrant problem to begin with. ItÂ’s now estimated that the illegal immigrant population is going to grow from the present 23 million to 60 million by 2013. That means weÂ’re going to have an additional 37 million illegals in this country in just 6 short years. Man! Those are some pretty expensive strawberries! Well I say, letÂ’s take a stand against the agricultural industry and take our country back by letting their strawberries rot! Peak strawberry season runs from late May and June so donÂ’t buy any strawberries throughout the rest of 2007. We can certainly live without their strawberries. If this works, weÂ’ll boycott American lettuce and other produce. And donÂ’t worry about your food prices going up. Ironically, Mexico is an agriculturally rich nation and it will actually be cheaper to have our produce imported from that country than to let our greedy farmers turns us into an over-populated third world nation. So pass this email on to everyone you know! LetÂ’s stick together and defend our nation by saying to hell with AmericaÂ’s traitorous farm industry. Let their damn fields rot!

Let us see if john edwards would do anything to stop the coming civil/race war. many things have been said but it's alway's a hypocite talking with hate in his or her heart. if John Edwards will stop this evil act against this nation and keep his word i would vote for him but we all know why john edwars is saying what he is saying for your vote and his end game may not be yours, watch what he is saying and listen to Alex Jones and savage nation. but i still say Ron Paul is your only hope to stop what is happening.

"I still say Ron Paul is your only hope to stop what is happening" Eh? Paul our only hope? I would say Tancredo would get something done.

Lindsey Graham will just call you a bigot. Try proving you're not in front of a boneheaded audience that only pays attention to regular media, if that.

Let's face it - senior citizens VOTE. My choice of a good question for Edwards or for that matter, any Presidential candidate would be something like this: Do you really think that further weakening the Social Security fund by allowing amnestied illegal aliens access to it via totalization plus adding many low income workers who will take more out of it than they pay into it is a good idea? Seniors get jumpy when you talk about SS.

I like only hope things! hope is evil. the system will eat all of you alive someday and you will like it.

D Flinchum understand what is happening all to well. by the way it is over inside this once great nation a few people will fight but most will become Mexicans over night, watch and see if i am right!

_...many low income workers who will take more out of it than they pay into it is a good idea?_ Of course it isn't, and this is just one reason this whole rotten business stinks, albeit a very good one. Furthermore, it's true that the average middle class taxpayer, which probably describes most of the kids and then grandkids of soon to retire boomers, pays more into SS than he can expect to get out of it. Ask them how they like the idea of their grandchildren working to pay not only the SS benefits for a lot of poor immigrants, but also SSI etc for their elderly parents [1], people who never contributed anything here but came under family reunification.


eh, you have lit upon one of my very favorite rants: "family reunification", especially when the reunited sick old 'rents get placed on SSI! Matloff, whom you link to and who deals mainly with Chinese immigrants in his testimony before Congress, also says that there are a number of publications both in their country of origin and in the US that explain to these new elderly immigrants how to navigate the government maze in order to maximize their welfare benefits. These publications may have advice columns that answer questions regarding eligibility. Two of my favorites examples are as follows: An immigrant who came to the US to visit her children on a tourist visa overstayed the visa, remaining here illegally, but did eventually receive her green card. She now wanted to know if her time, some of it illegal, in the US would count toward the three-year waiting period for benefits. Another person wanted to know if the fact that her mother returned “home” to Asia for a year and a half would cancel her SSI benefits and if she would have to re-apply for SSI from scratch when she returned. A year and a half? So much for “family reunification”. As a well-known comic writer says, “You can’t make this stuff up.” There is considerable indication that many of these children who bring their parents to the US are mainly looking for free temporary baby-sitting services. After their children are older, they then push their parents, also older and often frailer, out on their own, where they become dependent on social services and SSI - and by then they have qualified by being here 3 years. It is obvious that the kids are planning on putting their parents on SSI even as they fill out the forms stating that they can afford to support them.

_It is obvious that the kids are planning on putting their parents on SSI even as they fill out the forms stating that they can afford to support them._ This is another area where the law is just not enforced -- going after the sponsor (family reunification is a form of sponsored immigration) when immigrants end up on benefits. The sponsor signs a legally binding affidavit of support. Naturally this is as massive problem, and the best solution is to avoid by limiting family reunification.

One word describes this latest baloney from our fearless illegal immigrant vote seeking legislators = AMNESTY The first time an illegal immigrant doesn't have the $1-5,000 to pay a fine or have the funds to travel back to their homeland to get paperwork ===== the ACLU, LaRaza, CAIR etc will be filing lawsuits across the USA citing discrimination and immigrant bashing - just like they are doing now. Just wait until someone can't get a relative into the USA - "Oh she is sick & was like a mother to me" - "He may be my cousin but he is my only relative" etc (see paragraph 2) Illegal immigrants doesn't pass background check (see paragraph 2) Illegal immigrant graduated from high school but didn't go into the military or to college (see paragraph 2) Temporary Farm Workers wants to stay in USA and not go home after 2 yrs. (See paragraph 2) ETC. ETC. Who is going to determine when our borders are actually "secure"? Who is going to register all of these illegal immigrants? Who is going to monitor their progress thru the "system". Who is going to determine the verification of documents? Who is going to deport those that don't comply? How many appeals do they get? Who is the final "Decider". Who is going to do criminal background checks in the immigrants homeland or are we just going to take their word that they aren't a serial rapist or child molester, etc.? We are repeatedly told we can't deport immigration now - can we really believe that our INS will deport those that break the "new" laws? PLUS THESE LEGISLATORS/IDIOTS DON'T EVEN HAVE THE FOGGIEST IDEA OF ANY FINANCIAL IMPACT TO THE COUNTRY = INCOMPETENT!!! I fine it almost unbelieveable watching the Democratic Party play the fools to the Republican George W. Bust -as well as watch them give preferential treatment to intentional lawbreakers over legal aliens and those who chose to respect our laws and are waiting to enter the US legally. These BUSHocrats crafted a bill that will continue to COMPREHENSIVELY decimate the lower and mid/lower income Americans by facilitating ever lower wages and devalued jobs. My fearless Democrats have chosen to ignore the wishes of the vast majority of Americans and belly-up to Big Business & Special Interest Groups. I am too disgusted for words - AS YOU SAID -you couldn't make this baloney up!

Allright! Here's some modern democracy in action! With the big media in a stranglehold by the left, the Internet is almost the -last- way the average citizen can be heard and poke holes in the stuffed shirts that run our country. A huge part of this the $ issue: the costs of subsidising illegal families is enourmous. It is partly that way because of the Catholic Church's position on birth control. (which is: bad! Very bad!) That policy effectivly gives sanction to Mexicans to screw like rabbits and have big families - and plenty of anchor babies. It is a shame to the cause of Christ that their stubborn thinking is causing misery and starvation for children born into dreadful living conditions. How would Mexicans like it if we ducked into the borders and demanded free medical care?

We can not trust the Congress to always act in a legitimate manner. We need to keep our efforts strong and ongoing to assure that the border is protected against invaders and that no benefits are given to any criminials.

The crime statistics from illegals in this country is shocking, if they are here illegal they are lawbreakers. I wish we could ease up on immigration laws, but let the educated, disease free, non-criminals in.