Illegal's Right To Work

[Oldglory1]

Illegals have rights to rape, murderer, and drive cars without licenses, let alone immigrate illegally. Now, most people from all other non Hispanic countries have always immigrated LEGALY, including both my great grand patents from Germany and Ireland. BOTH OF MY Great Grand parents all had to struggle, but they didn't lie or ignore the rules to get on up in here, either, Hispanics....wow. Can't criticize them, that is racist. Wow.

It has to do with our Commerce Clause and why the right loves to reduce social spending on the least wealthy, and claim it is because they are not "worth it" under any form of Capitalism--instead of make more money with an official Mint at their disposal when they are in the majority.

And this has what to do with our immigration laws?

 

[danielpalos]

Illegals have rights to rape, murderer, and drive cars without licenses, let alone immigrate illegally. Now, most people from all other non Hispanic countries have always immigrated LEGALY, including both my great grand patents from Germany and Ireland. BOTH OF MY Great Grand parents all had to struggle, but they didn't lie or ignore the rules to get on up in here, either, Hispanics....wow. Can't criticize them, that is racist. Wow.

It has to do with our Commerce Clause and why the right loves to reduce social spending on the least wealthy, and claim it is because they are not "worth it" under any form of Capitalism--instead of make more money with an official Mint at their disposal when they are in the majority.

And this has what to do with our immigration laws?

Immigration laws are not employment at will laws. It really is that simple.

 

[Greeneyedlady]

The Commerce clause does not allow illegals to work in our country without government papers. They have NO right to work in the US. What part of that do you not understand?

 

[danielpalos]

The Commerce clause does not allow illegals to work in our country without government papers. They have NO right to work in the US. What part of that do you not understand?

Our Commerce Clause means our laws must engage in Commerce not forms of Prohibition.

 

[Oldglory1]

The Commerce clause does not allow illegals to work in our country without government papers. They have NO right to work in the US. What part of that do you not understand?

Our Commerce Clause means our laws must engage in Commerce not forms of Prohibition.

And just what do our immigration laws state?

 

[danielpalos]

The Commerce clause does not allow illegals to work in our country without government papers. They have NO right to work in the US. What part of that do you not understand?

Our Commerce Clause means our laws must engage in Commerce not forms of Prohibition.

And just what do our immigration laws state?

They cannot be repugnant to our Commerce Clause if labor is engaged in Commerce. In any case, not all foreign labor wants to immigrate to the US, but merely try their luck in our markets.

 

[Oldglory1]

The Commerce clause does not allow illegals to work in our country without government papers. They have NO right to work in the US. What part of that do you not understand?

Our Commerce Clause means our laws must engage in Commerce not forms of Prohibition.

And just what do our immigration laws state?

They cannot be repugnant to our Commerce Clause if labor is engaged in Commerce. In any case, not all foreign labor wants to immigrate to the US, but merely try their luck in our markets.

And this has what to do with our immigration laws? Why do you refuse to answer that when we keep asking you? Any so-called Commerce Claus does not negate our immigration laws nor our right to enforce them.

 

[danielpalos]

The Commerce clause does not allow illegals to work in our country without government papers. They have NO right to work in the US. What part of that do you not understand?

Our Commerce Clause means our laws must engage in Commerce not forms of Prohibition.

And just what do our immigration laws state?

They cannot be repugnant to our Commerce Clause if labor is engaged in Commerce. In any case, not all foreign labor wants to immigrate to the US, but merely try their luck in our markets.

And this has what to do with our immigration laws? Why do you refuse to answer that when we keep asking you? Any so-called Commerce Claus does not negate our immigration laws nor our right to enforce them.

Immigration has nothing to do with Commerce; usually. They are two separate concepts. We do have a Commerce Clause; why are we losing money on Commerce at our borders?

 

[mudwhistle]

Vitter: AG Nominee Lynch's Claim Illegals Have 'Right' to Work in U.S. 'Just Absolutely Crazy'

Speaking about Attorney General nominee Loretta Lynch’s statement that illegal aliens have the “right to work” in the United States, Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) said he was “astounded” by Lynch’s comments, calling them “crazy” and “just not true.”

During her confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Lynch asserted that illegal aliens living in the United States shared the same right to work as U.S. citizens and legal residents.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) asked Lynch during the hearing, “Who has more right to a job in this country" – citizens and legal permanent residents or illegal aliens?

“I believe that the right and the obligation to work is one that's shared by everyone in this country regardless of how they came here,” Lynch responded.

Vitter also said he was not surprised Lynch’s support for illegal aliens’ “right to work” in the United States did not get much airtime in the mainstream media last week.

“It doesn’t surprise me,” Vitter explained, adding that “the mainstream media has a history of not covering things or reporting things that are critical of the president’s agenda, and clearly it’s no different with this issue.”

Vitter AG Nominee Lynch s Claim Illegals Have Right to Work in U.S. Just Absolutely Crazy CNS News

Is our government working for us, or against us?

Maybe the right is confusing felonies with misdemeanors.

Failure to appear for your hearing is a felony.

Today, the definition of “aggravated felony” covers more than thirty types of offenses, including simple battery, theft, filing a false tax return, and failing to appear in court.​

Mobile Site Preview

 

[Oldglory1]

The Commerce clause does not allow illegals to work in our country without government papers. They have NO right to work in the US. What part of that do you not understand?

Our Commerce Clause means our laws must engage in Commerce not forms of Prohibition.

And just what do our immigration laws state?

They cannot be repugnant to our Commerce Clause if labor is engaged in Commerce. In any case, not all foreign labor wants to immigrate to the US, but merely try their luck in our markets.

And this has what to do with our immigration laws? Why do you refuse to answer that when we keep asking you? Any so-called Commerce Claus does not negate our immigration laws nor our right to enforce them.

Immigration has nothing to do with Commerce; usually. They are two separate concepts. We do have a Commerce Clause; why are we losing money on Commerce at our borders?

I don't know. Why are you more concerned about that than the illegal invasion of our country? That is costing us billions a year. And again, even though they are two separate concepts any Commerce Clause does not negate our immigration laws.

 

[danielpalos]

Vitter: AG Nominee Lynch's Claim Illegals Have 'Right' to Work in U.S. 'Just Absolutely Crazy'

Speaking about Attorney General nominee Loretta Lynch’s statement that illegal aliens have the “right to work” in the United States, Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) said he was “astounded” by Lynch’s comments, calling them “crazy” and “just not true.”

During her confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Lynch asserted that illegal aliens living in the United States shared the same right to work as U.S. citizens and legal residents.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) asked Lynch during the hearing, “Who has more right to a job in this country" – citizens and legal permanent residents or illegal aliens?

“I believe that the right and the obligation to work is one that's shared by everyone in this country regardless of how they came here,” Lynch responded.

Vitter also said he was not surprised Lynch’s support for illegal aliens’ “right to work” in the United States did not get much airtime in the mainstream media last week.

“It doesn’t surprise me,” Vitter explained, adding that “the mainstream media has a history of not covering things or reporting things that are critical of the president’s agenda, and clearly it’s no different with this issue.”

Vitter AG Nominee Lynch s Claim Illegals Have Right to Work in U.S. Just Absolutely Crazy CNS News

Is our government working for us, or against us?

Maybe the right is confusing felonies with misdemeanors.

Failure to appear for your hearing is a felony.

Today, the definition of “aggravated felony” covers more than thirty types of offenses, including simple battery, theft, filing a false tax return, and failing to appear in court.​

Mobile Site Preview

What if they don't fail to appear?

 

[danielpalos]

Our Commerce Clause means our laws must engage in Commerce not forms of Prohibition.

And just what do our immigration laws state?

They cannot be repugnant to our Commerce Clause if labor is engaged in Commerce. In any case, not all foreign labor wants to immigrate to the US, but merely try their luck in our markets.

And this has what to do with our immigration laws? Why do you refuse to answer that when we keep asking you? Any so-called Commerce Claus does not negate our immigration laws nor our right to enforce them.

Immigration has nothing to do with Commerce; usually. They are two separate concepts. We do have a Commerce Clause; why are we losing money on Commerce at our borders?

I don't know. Why are you more concerned about that than the illegal invasion of our country? That is costing us billions a year. And again, even though they are two separate concepts any Commerce Clause does not negate our immigration laws.

Because, I actually have enough of a clue and enough of a Cause, to know the difference between an invasion and migrant labor.

You claim it is costing us billions a year; we have a Commerce Clause, why are we losing money on Commerce at our borders. Are you finally admitting the right can't find Good capitalists who can actually make more money under our form of Capitalism, even with an official Mint at their disposal?

We should be solving our illegal problem on a permanent basis through Commerce, well regulated; it really should be that simple, except to the right.

 

[Greeneyedlady]

The Commerce clause does not allow illegals to work in our country without government papers. They have NO right to work in the US. What part of that do you not understand?

Our Commerce Clause means our laws must engage in Commerce not forms of Prohibition.

And just what do our immigration laws state?

APPLY AND GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, not jump the river!

 

[Oldglory1]

And just what do our immigration laws state?

They cannot be repugnant to our Commerce Clause if labor is engaged in Commerce. In any case, not all foreign labor wants to immigrate to the US, but merely try their luck in our markets.

And this has what to do with our immigration laws? Why do you refuse to answer that when we keep asking you? Any so-called Commerce Claus does not negate our immigration laws nor our right to enforce them.

Immigration has nothing to do with Commerce; usually. They are two separate concepts. We do have a Commerce Clause; why are we losing money on Commerce at our borders?

I don't know. Why are you more concerned about that than the illegal invasion of our country? That is costing us billions a year. And again, even though they are two separate concepts any Commerce Clause does not negate our immigration laws.

Because, I actually have enough of a clue and enough of a Cause, to know the difference between an invasion and migrant labor.

You claim it is costing us billions a year; we have a Commerce Clause, why are we losing money on Commerce at our borders. Are you finally admitting the right can't find Good capitalists who can actually make more money under our form of Capitalism, even with an official Mint at their disposal?

We should be solving our illegal problem on a permanent basis through Commerce, well regulated; it really should be that simple, except to the right.

Migrant labor here without authorization is a violation of our immigration laws. What part of that aren't you getting? If we are losing commerce dollars at the border then that is a separate issue from allowing millions of illegal aliens flood our borders. Address it separately then. I am addressing the billions of lost tax dollars due to illegal aliens living in the interior of our nation. Stay on topic, will you?

How does addressing commerce at the border have anything to do with the fact that we don't have the jobs and resources to support illegal aliens in the interior of our nation? You never explain WTH you are talking about. You talk in riddles.

 

[Oldglory1]

They cannot be repugnant to our Commerce Clause if labor is engaged in Commerce. In any case, not all foreign labor wants to immigrate to the US, but merely try their luck in our markets.

And this has what to do with our immigration laws? Why do you refuse to answer that when we keep asking you? Any so-called Commerce Claus does not negate our immigration laws nor our right to enforce them.

Immigration has nothing to do with Commerce; usually. They are two separate concepts. We do have a Commerce Clause; why are we losing money on Commerce at our borders?

I don't know. Why are you more concerned about that than the illegal invasion of our country? That is costing us billions a year. And again, even though they are two separate concepts any Commerce Clause does not negate our immigration laws.

Because, I actually have enough of a clue and enough of a Cause, to know the difference between an invasion and migrant labor.

You claim it is costing us billions a year; we have a Commerce Clause, why are we losing money on Commerce at our borders. Are you finally admitting the right can't find Good capitalists who can actually make more money under our form of Capitalism, even with an official Mint at their disposal?

We should be solving our illegal problem on a permanent basis through Commerce, well regulated; it really should be that simple, except to the right.

Migrant labor here without authorization is a violation of our immigration laws. What part of that aren't you getting? If we are losing commerce dollars at the border then that is a separate issue from allowing millions of illegal aliens flood our borders and go into the interior of our nation and suck up jobs and taxes. Address it separately then. I am addressing the billions of lost tax dollars due to illegal aliens living in the interior of our nation. Stay on topic, will you?

How does addressing commerce at the border have anything to do with the fact that we don't have the jobs and resources to support illegal aliens in the interior of our nation? You never explain WTH you are talking about. You talk in riddles.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

They cannot be repugnant to our Commerce Clause if labor is engaged in Commerce. In any case, not all foreign labor wants to immigrate to the US, but merely try their luck in our markets.

And this has what to do with our immigration laws? Why do you refuse to answer that when we keep asking you? Any so-called Commerce Claus does not negate our immigration laws nor our right to enforce them.

Immigration has nothing to do with Commerce; usually. They are two separate concepts. We do have a Commerce Clause; why are we losing money on Commerce at our borders?

I don't know. Why are you more concerned about that than the illegal invasion of our country? That is costing us billions a year. And again, even though they are two separate concepts any Commerce Clause does not negate our immigration laws.

Because, I actually have enough of a clue and enough of a Cause, to know the difference between an invasion and migrant labor.

You claim it is costing us billions a year; we have a Commerce Clause, why are we losing money on Commerce at our borders. Are you finally admitting the right can't find Good capitalists who can actually make more money under our form of Capitalism, even with an official Mint at their disposal?

We should be solving our illegal problem on a permanent basis through Commerce, well regulated; it really should be that simple, except to the right.

Migrant labor here without authorization is a violation of our immigration laws. What part of that aren't you getting? If we are losing commerce dollars at the border then that is a separate issue from allowing millions of illegal aliens flood our borders. Address it separately then. I am addressing the billions of lost tax dollars due to illegal aliens living in the interior of our nation. Stay on topic, will you?

How does addressing commerce at the border have anything to do with the fact that we don't have the jobs and resources to support illegal aliens in the interior of our nation? You never explain WTH you are talking about. You talk in riddles.

Which is why I stopped responding to the idiot.

 

[danielpalos]

The Commerce clause does not allow illegals to work in our country without government papers. They have NO right to work in the US. What part of that do you not understand?

You need to read State Constitutions; and not Only that, but also be cognizant of the legal fact that Immigration into the Union is no longer a States right since 1808. It really is that simple, except to the disingenuous right--or, is the right going to stop nullifying federal gun control laws as well.

 

[danielpalos]

Our Commerce Clause means our laws must engage in Commerce not forms of Prohibition.

And just what do our immigration laws state?

They cannot be repugnant to our Commerce Clause if labor is engaged in Commerce. In any case, not all foreign labor wants to immigrate to the US, but merely try their luck in our markets.

And this has what to do with our immigration laws? Why do you refuse to answer that when we keep asking you? Any so-called Commerce Claus does not negate our immigration laws nor our right to enforce them.

Immigration has nothing to do with Commerce; usually. They are two separate concepts. We do have a Commerce Clause; why are we losing money on Commerce at our borders?

I don't know. Why are you more concerned about that than the illegal invasion of our country? That is costing us billions a year. And again, even though they are two separate concepts any Commerce Clause does not negate our immigration laws.

I don't know why you so cognitively dissonant or ignorant of the difference between an Invasion and migrant labor. Migrant labor is a form of Commerce; Immigration is not in that same class of Commerce.

 

[danielpalos]

And this has what to do with our immigration laws? Why do you refuse to answer that when we keep asking you? Any so-called Commerce Claus does not negate our immigration laws nor our right to enforce them.

Immigration has nothing to do with Commerce; usually. They are two separate concepts. We do have a Commerce Clause; why are we losing money on Commerce at our borders?

I don't know. Why are you more concerned about that than the illegal invasion of our country? That is costing us billions a year. And again, even though they are two separate concepts any Commerce Clause does not negate our immigration laws.

Because, I actually have enough of a clue and enough of a Cause, to know the difference between an invasion and migrant labor.

You claim it is costing us billions a year; we have a Commerce Clause, why are we losing money on Commerce at our borders. Are you finally admitting the right can't find Good capitalists who can actually make more money under our form of Capitalism, even with an official Mint at their disposal?

We should be solving our illegal problem on a permanent basis through Commerce, well regulated; it really should be that simple, except to the right.

Migrant labor here without authorization is a violation of our immigration laws. What part of that aren't you getting? If we are losing commerce dollars at the border then that is a separate issue from allowing millions of illegal aliens flood our borders and go into the interior of our nation and suck up jobs and taxes. Address it separately then. I am addressing the billions of lost tax dollars due to illegal aliens living in the interior of our nation. Stay on topic, will you?

How does addressing commerce at the border have anything to do with the fact that we don't have the jobs and resources to support illegal aliens in the interior of our nation? You never explain WTH you are talking about. You talk in riddles.

Dude, it is usually only a misdemeanor to "jaywalk" across an imaginary State line without inspection. It is the ignorance of the right that prevents them from understanding the fundamental problems of our republic; unfortunately, they don't mind appealing to ignorance of the law while maybe holding any old book in their hands and proclaiming they are for the "gospel Truth".

 

[danielpalos]

And this has what to do with our immigration laws? Why do you refuse to answer that when we keep asking you? Any so-called Commerce Claus does not negate our immigration laws nor our right to enforce them.

Immigration has nothing to do with Commerce; usually. They are two separate concepts. We do have a Commerce Clause; why are we losing money on Commerce at our borders?

I don't know. Why are you more concerned about that than the illegal invasion of our country? That is costing us billions a year. And again, even though they are two separate concepts any Commerce Clause does not negate our immigration laws.

Because, I actually have enough of a clue and enough of a Cause, to know the difference between an invasion and migrant labor.

You claim it is costing us billions a year; we have a Commerce Clause, why are we losing money on Commerce at our borders. Are you finally admitting the right can't find Good capitalists who can actually make more money under our form of Capitalism, even with an official Mint at their disposal?

We should be solving our illegal problem on a permanent basis through Commerce, well regulated; it really should be that simple, except to the right.

Migrant labor here without authorization is a violation of our immigration laws. What part of that aren't you getting? If we are losing commerce dollars at the border then that is a separate issue from allowing millions of illegal aliens flood our borders. Address it separately then. I am addressing the billions of lost tax dollars due to illegal aliens living in the interior of our nation. Stay on topic, will you?

How does addressing commerce at the border have anything to do with the fact that we don't have the jobs and resources to support illegal aliens in the interior of our nation? You never explain WTH you are talking about. You talk in riddles.

Which is why I stopped responding to the idiot.

You stopped responding simply because you ran out of a clue and a Cause with Only fallacy at your disposal.