David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message
...
m II wrote:

dxAce wrote:

Doesn't matter, oh faux one. Thing is, folks learned that they no
longer wanted
you around as you're a damn pedantic piece of crap.
I am really happy that you are finally recognizing your superiors.
How so?

You
will be much happier once you accept the stature of your station in
life.
My station is pretty damn good.
I doubt that a lot. You live off the dole.

For a man who endorses illegal immigrants sucking up the resources of a
nation into which they were never invited, you got a damned lot of nerve
commenting on a legal citizen's retirement.

I do not believe in illegal immigration, and believe there should be
controls as well as enforcement. However, those here with no criminal record
should have a path to residency, particularly if they have children born or
naturalized here.


So, you believe in amnesty for illegal immigration. Thanks for
clearing that up.


As a citizen, I have a right to that opinion, and I have the right to
suspect that Steve Lare is somehow scamming the government and me, as a
taxpayer.



You, taking the high ground in civic matters....

Pancho, you are quite the hoot.

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:

I do not believe in illegal immigration, and believe there should be
controls as well as enforcement. However, those here with no criminal
record should have a path to residency, particularly if they have
children born or naturalized here.


So, you believe in amnesty for illegal immigration. Thanks for clearing
that up.

I believe in a path to legal residence, not amnesty. Those with a criminal
record (criminal, not misdemeanors) should not be eligible. All others
should be considered, perhaps made to pay a fine and some costs, but if they
have family and children here, allowed to become a resident and, eventually,
a citizen.

In other words, pretty much the plan of the Democrats and that of
organizations such as the NCLR.

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
I do not believe in illegal immigration, and believe there should be
controls as well as enforcement. However, those here with no criminal
record should have a path to residency, particularly if they have
children born or naturalized here.

So, you believe in amnesty for illegal immigration. Thanks for clearing
that up.

I believe in a path to legal residence, not amnesty. Those with a criminal
record (criminal, not misdemeanors) should not be eligible. All others
should be considered, perhaps made to pay a fine and some costs, but if they
have family and children here, allowed to become a resident and, eventually,
a citizen.


So, they can **** their way into the US.


In other words, pretty much the plan of the Democrats and that of
organizations such as the NCLR.


Uh huh. Hold me up. That's too much a shocker for this late in the
evening.

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:

I do not believe in illegal immigration, and believe there should be
controls as well as enforcement. However, those here with no criminal
record should have a path to residency, particularly if they have
children born or naturalized here.


So, you believe in amnesty for illegal immigration. Thanks for clearing
that up.

I believe in a path to legal residence, not amnesty. Those with a criminal
record (criminal, not misdemeanors) should not be eligible. All others
should be considered, perhaps made to pay a fine and some costs, but if they
have family and children here, allowed to become a resident and, eventually,
a citizen.

In other words, pretty much the plan of the Democrats and that of
organizations such as the NCLR.

You should believe in honesty and being forthright and have a desire not
to live amongst criminals or cater to them.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:

You should believe in honesty and being forthright and have a desire not
to live amongst criminals or cater to them.




Why do you think he stayed out of Washington?



mike


--
Due to the insane amount of spam and garbage, this filter
blocks all postings from Gmail, Google Mail and Google Groups.

http://improve-usenet.org/

In article ynJ2k.205$sg6.60@edtnps91, m II wrote:

Telamon wrote:

You should believe in honesty and being forthright and have a desire not
to live amongst criminals or cater to them.




Why do you think he stayed out of Washington?

There are more criminals where he lives in LA.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:

Why do you think he stayed out of Washington?

There are more criminals where he lives in LA.


Perhaps in total, but you have to look at the per capita numbers.


mike

--
Due to the insane amount of spam and garbage, this filter
blocks all postings from Gmail, Google Mail and Google Groups.

http://improve-usenet.org/

m II wrote:

Telamon wrote:

Why do you think he stayed out of Washington?

There are more criminals where he lives in LA.


Perhaps in total, but you have to look at the per capita numbers.

Per capita, there are more dumbasses in CanaDuh than anyplace else in the world.

Now go grab your shine box and join 'Eduardo'.

On Jun 7, 7:59*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in ...

- - - David Eduardo wrote:
- - - I do not believe in illegal immigration, and believe
- - - there should be controls as well as enforcement.
- - - However, those here with no criminal record should
- - - have a path to residency, particularly if they have
- - - children born or naturalized here.

- - So, you believe in amnesty for illegal immigration.
- - Thanks for clearing that up.

- I believe in a path to legal residence, not amnesty.

d"Eduardo,

Hey We Can Agree -Provided- The Path Leads Straight
Back To Mexico -Where- They Can Wait-in-Line To
Legally Enter The USA As A Legal Resident.

dang that was simple ~ RHF

- Those with a criminal record (criminal, not misdemeanors)
- should not be eligible. All others should be considered,
- perhaps made to pay a fine and some costs, but if they
- have family and children here, allowed to become a resident
- and, eventually, a citizen.
-
- In other words, pretty much the plan of the Democrats
- and that of organizations such as the NCLR.
-

RHF wrote:

On Jun 7, 7:59 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in ...

- - - David Eduardo wrote:
- - - I do not believe in illegal immigration, and believe
- - - there should be controls as well as enforcement.
- - - However, those here with no criminal record should
- - - have a path to residency, particularly if they have
- - - children born or naturalized here.

- - So, you believe in amnesty for illegal immigration.
- - Thanks for clearing that up.

- I believe in a path to legal residence, not amnesty.

d"Eduardo,

Hey We Can Agree -Provided- The Path Leads Straight
Back To Mexico -Where- They Can Wait-in-Line To
Legally Enter The USA As A Legal Resident.

dang that was simple ~ RHF

- Those with a criminal record (criminal, not misdemeanors)
- should not be eligible. All others should be considered,
- perhaps made to pay a fine and some costs, but if they
- have family and children here, allowed to become a resident
- and, eventually, a citizen.
-
- In other words, pretty much the plan of the Democrats
- and that of organizations such as the NCLR.

Sorry, they need to go back home and wait in line like anyone else.

What part of the word 'illegal' doesn't register in your pea sized brain?