Check this out. I wrote to our US Senator, Dick Durbin, regarding recent legislation he is sponsoring: http://durbin.senate.gov/showRelease.cfm?releaseId=280889
This back door amnesty program is supposedly "for the children". I wrote to him (http://durbin.senate.gov/contact.cfm) asking for him to explain why certain criminals needed preferential treatment and why was I going to be forced to pay for it. Here was his response (it's difficult reading, he really need to learn how to break up paragraphs):
Of course, I had to reply. Here is my response:
In response to you your e-mail to me on 9/21/2007:
First, you started off your response by incorrectly stating: "Thank you for contacting me about the education of immigrant children."
This statement is simply wrong, I wrote to you about giving preferential treatment to criminals. It has nothing to do with "the education of immigrant children". Immigrant children are the children of immigrants, not the children of criminals that have broken into our country. That is why we use the term "Illegal Alien” to describe this type of criminal.
You then made the statement: "Some children do not have the chance to attend college and reach their full potential because they are undocumented."
Exactly how is this my fault? Why should I have to pay for it? Is it not their parents that decided become criminals by breaking into our country? Using the term “undocumented” to try to water down the subject accomplishes nothing. They are still criminals.
You go to mention: "The DREAM Act would enable undocumented immigrants to earn the right to apply for legal residency by allowing them to apply for conditional resident status and apply for college on the same terms as other students if they 1) have lived in the U.S. for at least five years; 2) have attended school in our country and graduated from high school; and 3) are of good moral character."
So, in the first two conditions, you are looking to allow only the better (more skilled) criminals? Like the ones that have managed to hide from INS for at least five years? And the ones that have somehow managed to avoid INS again and graduate from high school? Since when are Illegal Aliens admitted to public school? How long have I been paying for that? So, once you find some really skilled criminals, you then apply the third test: “are of good moral character”. In the eyes of the law (which what you trying to make here), how exactly is this measured? Also, if they passed the first two tests, haven't they, by default of being criminals, failed the the third test?
You then state: “Furthermore, Urban Institute and U.S. Census figures show that undocumented immigrant children who meet the criteria spelled out in this measure represent less than two percent of all high school graduates each year.”
Aren't you misusing the term “undocumented” here? This appears to indicate that these criminals are “documented”. If they were “undocumented”, exactly how are they being measured? It also appears that we have official systems in place to “look the other way” when these criminals are detected. Is not the act of “looking the other way” criminal in itself? What is being done about this? Also, if we know that 2% (or more) of high school graduates are Illegal Aliens, isn't 2% of the money I pay to support public education being used to fund illegal activities? As far as I know, knowingly funding criminal activity is in itself a crime. How do I go about making myself legal again by not paying for the 2% (or more) that I am currently being forced to pay? How do I get my government stop forcing me to be a criminal too (by forcing me to fund this type of illegal activity)? Is that not a criminal act on the part of the government as well?
Next you state: “Throughout my service in Congress, I have supported efforts to deter illegal immigration.“
Exactly how would this effort “deter illegal immigration”? On the contrary, this legislation appears to very much support “illegal immigration”. This appears to indicate that you no longer support efforts to deter illegal immigration. Exactly how does this benefit you? It clearly does not benefit our country.
Finally you state: “I also voted in favor of the USA PATRIOT Act, which tripled the number of agents along our northern border and strengthened the standards for the issuance of visas."
I did not realize that you had been that worried about the Canadians until know. Help me understand this, since when has our “northern border” been the primary point of entry for illegal aliens? You statement appears to completely avoid the real issue here. What is being done to secure the all of our borders, including the one you appear to be avoiding, the southern border. I forgot, your against “the fence”. Why exactly did you avoid mentioning the southern border?
How is breaking into my country different than breaking into my house? I would assume that you would have no problems prosecuting a criminal that breaks into my house. Why is breaking into my country any different? Do you have something to gain from these criminal activities that your not telling us about? Please come clean here.
-Bob
Let's see what happens now...