Sorry, but anyone who wants to reward law breakers is not a conservative. You, my friend, want to reward law breakers. That makes you a liberal not a conservative.

Here’s my list of the presidential candidates I’ve supported either through active campaigning, campaign contributions and/or at the ballot box (for the ones I was old enough to vote for) since 1960:

Richard Nixon
Barry Goldwater
Richard Nixon
Richard Nixon
Gerald Ford (supported Reagan at the convention)
Ronald Reagan
Ronald Reagan
George H.W. Bush
George H.W. Bush
Robert Dole
John McCain
George W. Bush
John McCain

You sure do have a way of sniffing out liberals. I admit to not having supported W in 2000. I still think that was the right call.

I cannot find any evidence of that. The correct legal term appears to be “illegal alien”.

Who said that, Strawman?

“I got yer uninspected entrant right ova heeere”

Up to 6 months in prison for the first offense and/or a fine.

“Civil penalties under this subsection are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be imposed.”

That’s self explanatory.

§ 1325. Improper entry by alien

(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts
Any alien who
(1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or
(2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or
(3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
(b) Improper time or place; civil penalties
Any alien who is apprehended while entering (or attempting to enter) the United States at a time or place other than as designated by immigration officers shall be subject to a civil penalty of—
(1) at least $50 and not more than $250 for each such entry (or attempted entry); or
(2) twice the amount specified in paragraph (1) in the case of an alien who has been previously subject to a civil penalty under this subsection.
Civil penalties under this subsection are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be imposed.

That phrase is found nowhere else on the Internet, so I can only surmise that it is a product of your rich imagination.

Rockefeller Republicans.

Obviously that guy who thought “homo sapien” was an insult to his sexual orientation isn’t the sort of rocket scientist we need to be importing.

What do you consider someone who has overstayed their Visa?

Did you see the recent poll that was taken in a number of Counties that asked the question of who was responsible for the attacks on Sept 11, 2001?

The majority of those asked in Mexico felt our own Government was responsible, the majority of the illegals we have come from Mexico. Therefore, you support people who think our own Government attacked the Pentagon and the World Trade Center Towers. You support giving them jobs over giving an American a job. I thought your support of child rapists and killers was bad, but this may be worse.

You simply are a liberal who is in denial of being one.

I’n pretty enthusiastic about the American Culture, and regard a lot of the rants here as completely contrary to it. I have no truck with whackos who blame America for 9/11 and doubt that there are many who sincerely believe that.

I’m a pretty hard-core conservative with the campaign ribbons to prove it. The conservative response to immigration is strong control at borders, streamlined and efficient screening of entrants (to ensure that backlog and bureaucratic delay don’t become incentives for going around border security), encouragement of citizenship and assimilative programs, and clear status requirements that crowd out all the black market, subterranean economy issues that you gripe about. As I’ve said before, a characteristic of winning national and regional economies in the 21st Century will be ones that are competitive for immigrant labor at all levels, particularly at the top end in the scientific and medical areas. You can’t encourage those people to come here in large numbers and stay as citizens if the culture tolerates red-in-the-face, voluble nonsense about immigrants being an undifferentiated mass of child rapists and murderers and those who advocate immigration reform as being of the same stripe.

Not as much fun as baying at the moon, but a rational policy choice consistent with conservative political and economic principles.

So, you would simply allow people who steal or buy Ids, drive without insurance, or licenses, to simply go free? Exactly how would you go about trying to sort the “good” illegals from the bad ones? I’m sure there are plenty of people who want to get rid of laws against murder. Would that be good for the Country? Going with your minimalist theme, the less laws we have the better. Hell, lets just get rid of all laws while we are at it. That way, we can be truly free.

The only liberal around here is you, you support taking jobs away from Americans and providing them to illegals. You support the importation of criminals that do not respect the rule of law, do not support this Country, do not support the American Culture. You support people who blame America for the terrorist attacks on 09/11/01. You support people who think nothing of raping and murdering kids.

The reason why you can’t answer the question of “is breaking the law and benefiting from it a conservative value” is because it is not a conservative value. It is a liberal value, and as a liberal that is something you can believe in.

Ineffective laws are anathema to us Conservatives. You’re kind of a broken record on this perpetual inquiry about how breaking the law is a conservative value. Depends on the law, I guess. Set a speed limit too low and a lot of people, including conservatives will break it. Try to overturn the laws of physics or economics, and a lot of people, including conservatives, will break it. Conservatives favor laws that promote economic efficiency and the mobility of capital and labor. Current immigration policy and law fail, in part, because we’ve got too much malum prohibitum and have not clearly defined malum in se. Conservatives prefer minimalist, but effective and predictable legal structures based on the latter. Knee-jerk liberals and heavy-handed regulators favor the former.

The law prescribes a civil monetary penalty for uninspected entry. I have no problem with that. I also have no problem with discretionary deportation by federal authorities. That’s the law. Deportation is not required, but it’s an available option. In cases of convictions for crimes, I support a default setting of deportation after serving the sentence. I think I’ve been plenty consistent on that point over the last several years.

Illegal alien is the correct, check it out in the regs.

Tell me exactly how breaking the law and benefiting from it is a conservative value? Wow, did you just contradict yourself? You have said you are for the deportation of illegals, now you say you are only in favor of deporting the criminals. So, what would you do with the illegals that in your opinion are not criminals?

You sure do parse the words, my friend, but you still end up supporting the folks who rape and murder children.