|
|||||||
| Elections, Politics, and Partisanship Topics relating to politics, elections, or party affiliations of interests to SOS associates |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
03-16-2010, 10:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Meg Whitman's Illegal Immigration Policy
This is the first I've seen of any concrete statements from Meg Whitman about illegal immigration. At the link scroll to page 37.
Some bullet points; - Complete the border fence - Eliminate sanctuary city policies - Deploy the national guard - E-verify and workplace inspections - Prohibit driver license for illegals - Enforce the English language more - http://www.scribd.com/doc/28473738/M...New-California 
|
|
#2
03-17-2010, 12:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
It all sounds pretty good, except the part about "enforcing" the English language. She defends proposition 227, which provides for English immersion programs. This is a public subsidized program to encourage and accomodate immigration from non-English speaking countries. It is the first responsibility of any immigrant to learn English before even considering coming here and not the responsibility of the US tax payer.
The emphasis on policing the workplace against illegals is also extremely weak and does not even examine the connection between legal and illegal immigrants, especially in the work place. The workplaces that we really need to worry about are those places owned or managed by non-citizens or who employ non-citizens anywhere in the employment process. She also does not address the anchor-baby problem which represents the single most corrupting part of immigration outside of illegal immigration. Nobody who is not the child of parents who are both US citizens need ever imagine that they are themselves US citizens. Nobody.
__________________
The United States of America is for citizens only! Everyone else OUT.
Criminalize asking party affilation for voter registration! End the "two party system"!
|
|
#4
03-17-2010, 02:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
If there are no candidates that you think you can support for governor, then you should not vote for any of them. If I don't think I can support any of the candidates for governor, that's what I'm going to do. I'll go to the polls this November and just vote on those other issues that might be on the ballot. I'll leave the choice for the governor unmarked or write through it or something. That's what I did for the presidential election. There ought to be a "none of the above" option on the ballot for any election or issue. There is some debate as to whether a "none of the above" choice should be binding or not. I would settle for nonbinding, but there are some places where if either candidate or side of an issue cannot secure a certain percentage of votes away from the "none of the above" voters, then there has to be a reelection or something. I'd especially like to see a "none of the above" option for propositions or issues. Sometimes the way the propositions are posed, you lose either way.
__________________
The United States of America is for citizens only! Everyone else OUT.
Criminalize asking party affilation for voter registration! End the "two party system"!
|
|
#5
03-17-2010, 04:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
That said, I haven't really looked into any of the candidates that closely. I posted the thread because I hadn't seen anyone's stance on the illegal immigration issue until this pdf.
|
|
#6
03-17-2010, 08:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
But if they just toss me crumbs and tell me that I have to choose them anyway because I can't get anything better, my answer is, "No, I don't." And it should be everyone's answer. The public should be tired of being milked by the "two party system".
__________________
The United States of America is for citizens only! Everyone else OUT.
Criminalize asking party affilation for voter registration! End the "two party system"!
|
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode
