It's quite apparent that you did not read the piece thoroughly enough.

I am quite sure that Diana has been paying taxes and subsidizing social security just like the other millions of undocumeneted immigrants who continue to keep social security solvent. And they have been doing so for so many years. The SSA admits that it needs a net increase of 100000 immigrants per year to keep social security alive.

Why are we turning away Diana, her taxes and her ability to help this country propser? She is a net benefit to this country, however you look at it.

who cares if diana is paying taxes and helping to keep social security solvent? those are problems that could be fixed by adhering to our constitution and ridding ourselves of the black hole that is social security. it is already insolvent, despite the addition of thirty million or so illegal aliens. once we get rid of welfare, in all its forms, medicare and medicaid, maybe we can talk about allowing the illegal aliens a path to citizenship.

I'm sorry, Prerna, but you need to substantiate your sources for your argument from an unbiased source.

Since those here without documentation can not work, how then is she paying into the SS system or any payroll taxes without a SS#, and don't attempt to think the ITIN will cover it as that comes back as a letter of no match from SS based on an I-9.

Liquids Reign, those here without documentation can work (how else would 12 million undocumented immigrants be able to exist in the U.S. when they're not even allowed any form of government aid?). They frequently work under-the-table/for cash.

Undocumented immigrants who initially came to America on a visa but overstayed CAN have Social Security numbers under their own names (if they applied for a SS # while their visas were not yet expired). Although the SS #s are "Not Valid for Employement", what is usually checked when it comes to employment is whether your name matches your SS #. Since Diana said that she could get a green card if she got married, it means that she initially came to the U.S. on a visa (those who entered illegally can't get a green card through marriage).

Source: My undocumented parents both have a SS #s, a driver's license, and has paid income taxes for the past 15 years.

You are making the assumption she can adjust status based on the presumed entrance on a visa. So to that I give the following.

In a recent 9th Circuit decision (Momeni v. Chertoff, March 31, 2008), the court held that a visa waiver entrant from Germany could not benefit from adjustment of status (green card application) from inside the US despite it being based on marriage to a U.S. citizen, due to overstay after the entrant was placed in removal proceedings before filing for adjustment. Under those facts, the visa waiver entrant would have to consular process and could be subject to an unlawful presence bar (3 or 10 years depending on the amount of time overstayed) which would require a lengthy waiver process to be able to re-enter the U.S. as well as grant from the Attorney General to let him come back despite a recent deportation.

What this case means at least in the 9th Circuit, is that it is riskier for a visa waiver entrant to apply for adjustment after the 90 day allotted stay expires. According to Diana she has been here 18 years, the question then comes down to how long has she overstayed her visa if indeed she entered on a visa.

CIS local offices may interpret this case to apply to visa waiver entrants who overstay their 90 days and then file a green card case (adjustment) whether or not a person is ever placed in removal, leading to a denial of the green card case. It's a catch in a way, because applying for an adjustment right after entry can lead to CIS concluding that the visa waiver entrant committed visa fraud at entry by really intending to move to the US on their visa waiver (which is the equivalent of a visitor's visa), which could result in denial of the adjustment application and eventual removal. Caselaw in other circuits may also affect visa entrants' ability to apply for permanent residency in the U.S.

I am assuming here about your parents: they have proliferated SS cards due to entry by visa and overstayed, they've also held the same job for some time, pretty much prior to their visa's expiring. I would be worried about their future, as states are changing rules on DL's and if they change jobs and present SS cards that state: Not Valid for Employment. IRS and SS are also changing the rules to catch these anomalies.

Source: My wife who has already gone through the process and now is a Citizen.

Dk I always get conflicting messages on the status of people and green cards. Tell me if this is true in this scenerio.

If someone came into the country unauthorized (No visa) and has lived in the US for over 10 years is it true if they marry they are given "unlimited US citizen rights" and they can apply for a greencard?

I have heard conflicting messages about this.

Illegal Entry and Marriage to U.S. Citizen.

A visa number becomes immediately available for immigration.

Can apply to adjust status (and live and work in the U.S. while waiting for application to adjust status) if:

Had a valid immigration petition pending before January 14, 1998, or

Had a valid immigration petition pending between January 14, 1998, and April 30, 2001, and were living in the U.S. on December 21, 2001.

Otherwise, must leave and apply for a waiver.

Illegal Entry and Marriage to U.S. Permanent Legal Resident.

Must wait for a visa number to become available.

Cannot live and work in the U.S. and cannot apply to adjust status here.

If the bar applies, must leave and apply for a waiver.

Mary,

Nope, it's not true. If someone entered the U.S. without authorization/"papers", they can NEVER adjust their status (get a green card or visa) inside the U.S. no matter how long they've lived here or who they marry.

The only way they could get a visa is if they were to leave the U.S. and apply for a U.S. visa from their birth countries. If an undocumented immigrant were to leave to his/her birth country, he/she would be subjected to a 3-year or 10-year ban from returning to America. There would also be a high possibility that he/she would get rejected for a U.S. visa (after waiting out the 3 or 10 year ban) because he/she had previously lived in the U.S. without authorization. You would be subjected to a 3-year ban if you stayed in the U.S. illegally for 180 days or less. You would be subjected to a 10-year ban if you stayed in the U.S. illegally for a year or more.

Liquid Reigns, that was a seriously dumb comment, even for you, but I am glad DK took care of it.

My source is the Social Security Administration, who gave me numbers personally this past January at the American Economic Association -- is that unbiased enough for you? The CBO was also there to back them up.

But regardless, given I am undocumented and the moderator on this blog, of course I work and pay taxes. I just wrote a check of $800 in taxes to the state franchise board last month. Would you like to see a copy? Though if I do show it to you, you really have to drop the 'illegal immigrants don't pay taxes' line.

P.S. Most undocumented immigrants can own a business in the United States and pay taxes without committing any sort of social security fraud.

So you are an "independent contractor" with an ITIN. Granted there are some that go the route you have, but it in no way is their enough persons jumping through the 'loopholes' you are, to sub-sidize SS the way you have implied.

Here's the contradiction:

DK states: those here without documentation can work (how else would 12 million undocumented immigrants be able to exist in the U.S. when they're not even allowed any form of government aid?). They frequently work under-the-table/for cash.

Prerna states: I am quite sure that Diana has been paying taxes and subsidizing social security just like the other millions of undocumeneted immigrants who continue to keep social security solvent. And they have been doing so for so many years.

So which is it? If they are being paid cash, how then are they propping up SS? And you are aware a check to the FTB of California doesn't go towards SS, right? So, I ask again, to substantiate your statements.

how else would 12 million undocumented immigrants be able to exist in the U.S. when they're not even allowed any form of government aid?

This has been proven incorrect so many times. State Governments do allow Entry Violators and Visa Overstayers to receive State Government Aid.

The Social Security Administration estimates that about three-quarters of illegal workers pay taxes that contribute to the overall solvency of Social Security and Medicare.

The agency estimates that for 2005, the last year for which figures are available, about $9 billion in taxes was paid on about $75 billion in wages from people who filed W2 forms with incorrect or mismatched data, which would include illegal immigrants who drew paychecks under fake names and Social Security numbers.

Spokesman Mark Hinkle says Social Security does not know how much of the $9 billion can be attributed to illegal immigrants. The number is certainly not 100%, but a significant portion probably comes from taxes paid by illegal immigrants.

Nine billion dollars sounds like a lot of money, and it is, but it is only about 1.5% of the total $593 billion paid into Social Security in 2005.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/2008-04-10-immigrantstaxes_N.htm

Now if only some pay into SS as stated above, and the $9B used is only 1.5% of the yearly amount received, than would that then not mean that approximately .5% - 1% "may" be paid by illegal immigrants. Hardly keeping SS solvent by themselves as implied by Prerna. Nobody is denying that some pay into the system, but you would have us believe that they all pay into it or that enough pay into it to provide a substantial benefit to the US. They may pay between $3 - $6B per year, and half of that is paid by the employer.

Though if I do show it to you, you really have to drop the 'illegal immigrants don't pay taxes' line.

I'm sorry, did I say they don't pay taxes? No, I didn't, I questioned how they were paying into SS and payroll taxes without a valid SS card. DK picked up on it, and clarified the argument, yet made some rather false statements as well, which I have clarified. You then come back with how you just paid FTB, which would only cover State Taxes from your money earned.

Now to call my comment dumb, I suggest you re-read it. You are projecting things on me that were not said nor implied by me. I asked the following here http://immigration.change.org/blog/view/a_transition_for_immigrant_rights_on_changeorg :

Maybe Change.org could quit deleting comments from members that point out and prove false and inaccurate arguments by PRO advocates. False and inaccurate claims are left as actual fact, falsely misleading to anybody reading the debate to truly be able to understand the arguments. How about some moderation for personal attacks instead, delete these vs. leaving them and deleting fair and opposing views.

Now, I see your half truth arguments and merely raise them to the actual factual truth. What I suggest is that if you PRO-migrant advocates would actually argue with the full truth, and word it correctly instead of implying things, you just might get the public to be on your side. The problem is you choose to call arguments/comments dumb, refuse to fully understand the oppositions points, and succumb to your own ignorance as in Peter Coytle. Remember, I am Joe Public, I am the one you need to have understand why Entry Violators and Visa Overstayers should be allowed to have a chance at legality.

Hey DK, Thank you for that info. because an attorney told a US borned friend of mine that she could marry an "undocumented" person and he could file the papers for them. When I heard that I told them I don't think they can but they claimed that the attorney said that recently there were changes in the law that now permitted it. So is it true that perhaps this attorney was trying to take advantage of them financially and to clarify your response is there any chance that any laws could have recently changed on this that we might have overlooked or do these people have to watch out what attorneys they go to??

Liquid Reign,

No, I did not make any "rather false statements".

Did you not read the second part of my post? Why are you ignoring the fact that undocumented immigrants can have SS #s and that many do? Yes, you were initially talking about social security and payroll (W-2) taxes. But you've suddenly made the conclusion in your later post that the only way (without "jumping through loopholes") undocumented immigrants are paying into SS is with W-2s:

"Now if only some pay into SS [through W-2s] as stated above, and the $9B used is only 1.5% of the yearly amount received, than would that then not mean that approximately .5% - 1% "may" be paid by illegal immigrants. Hardly keeping SS solvent by themselves as implied by Prerna."

My parents pay into state social security (perhaps THIS was the distinction you failed to make?), they cannot pay into federal social security. They have SS #s and pay taxes under the W-9 (independent contractor). They did not need to overcome any difficult "loopholes" in order to do so. And they get their Social Security Statements sent to them every year. Undocumented immigrants with SS #s frequently are independent contracters more so than W-2 (obviously).

Please give a source for "State Government do allow Entry Violators and Visa Overstayers to receive State Government Aid." It could be entirely possible, I'd like to know specifics... because I've clearly been missing out (if you say, "public education", I think that's an entirely different issue. No child should be kept uneducated.).

Let's face it, Joe Public. I'm not trying to be disrespectful, but is your understanding of how "Entry Violators and Visa Overstayers" pay into social security really going to convince you to vote in favor of the Dream Act or any other bill that gives undocumented immigrants a chance at legalization? It feels like you're just looking for another excuse to be against it.

What you've pasted: The Social Security Administration estimates that about three-quarters of illegal workers pay taxes that contribute to the overall solvency of Social Security and Medicare.

Three-quarters of undocumented workers are doing what they can to contribute to the country that gives them work. They're trying to do something legitimate (when they're not forced to) while shrouded in the restrictions of "illegitimacy". Should that convince you in any way to give them a chance at legality? No. But it should give you some of idea of the fact that if given a chance at legality, they can and WILL do more for America then they currently are able to. The least they would be able to do is pay into federal social security.

Mary,

It's a high possibility that this attorney was trying to take advantage of your friend financially. I doubt that any laws have passed recently concerning this because it would have been widely published in the pro-migrant communities and it hasn't. Your friend should still go seek a good immigration lawyer, maybe one listed in http://www.ailalawyer.com/ , just to make sure because everybody is under different circumstances.

Thank you DK, That was really kind of you to give me that information. I was pretty sure nothing changed. He said something like the "undocumented" person she married would be able to apply for a green card and apply for permanent residency because he lived in the US for over 10 years but and he mentioned a few laws recently changed but it sounded fishy to me. I will check into it and thank you for that link. It would be horrible if the attorney applied for them and put them in a horrible situation. Again, thanks for the info. I am assuming that some day the laws will change but I think they are better off sticking it out. :)

Liquid Reigns,

The fact that the government has itself admitted to surplus money it gets from taxes paid by undocumented immigrants is evidence enough. You completely ignore this. Then I proceed to show you other ways in which immigrants pay taxes. I think it is useless to waste time trying to convince someone who is dead set against any sort of legalization program, even for people who are a proven asset and net benefit to this country.

You probably also advocate removing a person like me from society with no criminal record, a graduate degree holder and someone who entered legally and waited in line for 10 years before aging out. I don't need your support to know that I am right and belong here. Neither does Diana.

DK says: No, I did not make any "rather false statements".  Yes, you did: how else would 12 million undocumented immigrants be able to exist in the U.S. when they're not even allowed any form of government aid?  Now, not only can they recieve State funded Aid, they CAN receive Federally funded Aid as well. (examples: Medicaid and TANF - Federally funded; Medi-cal -State funded; just to name a few that are pretty much universal, but each State has different laws.)

Here is a correction to DK's statement of: My parents pay into state social security (perhaps THIS was the distinction you failed to make?), they cannot pay into federal social security.  You are confusing State SSI (Supplemental Security Income) with that of Federal SSI (Social Security Insurance), they are not the same.

DK asks: Let's face it, Joe Public. I'm not trying to be disrespectful, but is your understanding of how "Entry Violators and Visa Overstayers" pay into social security really going to convince you to vote in favor of the Dream Act or any other bill that gives undocumented immigrants a chance at legalization?  If you do some research of my name on Change, you will note I have said in the past I am one of the 47% of the 63% that Mary likes to use that is willing to grant "legality" to those here "Illegally". I do not believe they should be granted Citizenship.

The hostility.... You have implied and would have us believe, Prerna that if not for the monies paid into SS by those ineligible, they are keeping SS solvent, when in fact they are merely paying less than 1% of the total. Nobody has denied the fact  that some pay into SS, whether willing or not, through the proper loopholes or not. Now I have ignored nothing, only pointed out your argument is in fact overreaching as you stated it, thus creating the dialogue. I have also never denied that they pay "taxes", everybody agrees they pay state mandated sales tax, and various other taxes that they pay simply by living here in a home.

The rest of your accusations have been answered above. I will say this though, my ideas of CIR are not the same as yours in all instances, there are some things that I think everybody agrees on, and many things that we don't. The trick is arguing with the factual truth vs. arguing with a broad brush making statements that are merely half truths. The health care debate is the perfect example, I agree we need HCR, but the Baucus Bill is completely against the will of the people. The problem is if you state something against the Baucus Bill you are deemed a hater and not wanting HCR.

I can only lead the horse to the water, its up to you to decide to die of thirst or to survive.

Hahaha, Liquids Reign, you're all over the place. But okay, I get what you've been saying. When you said:

I'm sorry, did I say they don't pay taxes? No, I didn't, I questioned how they were paying into SS and payroll taxes without a valid SS card. DK picked up on it, and clarified the argument, yet made some rather false statements as well, which I have clarified.

I rightfully thought that you were referring to my statements about SS #s as false. I had no idea that you were referring to the one sentence in the parentheses about "government aid". Okay, I'll concede on that. I didn't know undocumented immigrants were eligible for Medi-cal. What else besides medical care and public education are undocumented immigrants eligible for? Please, enlighten me.

You are confusing State SSI (Supplemental Security Income) with that of Federal SSI (Social Security Insurance), they are not the same.

No, I'm not. Why are you telling me what you would have no idea of knowing? I'm looking at my parents' Social Security Statments (dated Dec 2008) right now and it says,

"Your Estimated Benefits:

Retirement You have earned enough credits to qualify for benefits. At your current earnings rate, if you stop working...

Disability You have earned enough credits to qualify for benefits...

Family If you get retirement or disability benefits, your spouse and children also may qualify for benefits...

Survivors You have earned enough credits for your family to receive survivors benefits...

Medicare You have earned enough credits to qualify for Medicare at age 65..."

"You currently pay 6.2 percent of your salary, up to $102,000, in Social Security taxes and 1.45 percent in Medicare taxes on your entire salary... If you are self-employed, you pay the combined employee and employer amount of 12.4 percent in Social Security taxes and 2.9 percent in Medicare taxes on your net earnings."

These are benefits that my parents would never be able to get because they're undocumented.

You're for granting undocumented immigrants "legality". That's great. I don't think even undocumented immigrants want or are hoping for out-and-out citizenship. All they ask is a path to legality. Then, those who want to become citizens will be able to go through the naturalization process.

I was referring to your statement of: My parents pay into state social security that is why I clarified State Supplemental Insurance and Social Security Insurance are not the same.

I haven't told you something that I would have no idea of knowing, maybe you simply misspoke/typed, I'm simply trying to figure out what it was you said.

Here's your complete statement: My parents pay into state social security (perhaps THIS was the distinction you failed to make?), they cannot pay into federal social security.

No, I'm not "confusing State SSI (Supplemental Security Income) with that of Federal SSI (Social Security Insurance)" Because I've said "state social security," you've automatically assumed that that means "Supplemental Security Income". It doesn't. My parents can only pay state income taxes, they can't pay federal income taxes. When they pay their state income taxes, Social Security is automatically drawn from it. That's how they're paying into Social Security, that's why they recieve Social Security Statements every year.

This is from my parents' Social Security Statements, which is clearly states that they pay into Social Security:

"Your Estimated Benefits:

I'm not trying to harp on you or anything DK, but you have something amiss. You can not pay SS taxes through the state, SS taxes are deposited into a bank through form F941 quarterly. http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/f941--2000.pdf

FUTA (Federal Unemployment Tax Act) taxes are paid through form F940 yearly. http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f940.pdf

State Payroll taxes for self employed are paid on form DE-88, which covers UI (Unemployment Insurance), ETT (Employment Training Tax), SDI (State Disability Insurance), California PIT (Personal Income Tax),paid monthly or quarterly, http://www.edd.ca.gov/pdf_pub_ctr/de88all.pdf

So, if your parents are getting a Federal mailer yearly for their Federal SS, on the right hand opened page it will give you their Federal Income yearly since the began working/filing taxes. On the left page, what you have printed in your comments, their will be their yearly SS wages they can receive based on applying at age 62, at age 65, and family wages if he/she would pass away.

I own a business with employees, if you haven't figured that out.

Oh, don't ask me to explain it in detail; I've asked and even my parents don't know what exactly is with their taxes; they told me exactly what I told you (that they pay their state income tax and a part of that somehow goes to Social Security). Plus, they just send their paperwork to tax people and they do it, so my parents are pretty out of the loop. But they used to pay federal income taxes (when their visas were still valid), which might be why they can still pay into SS now. Yes, the right-hand opened page does have my parents' "Your Earnings Record" with "Years You Worked" "Your Taxed Social Security Earnings" and "Your Taxed Medicare Earnings". It indeed appears to be a "Federal mailer".

I personally don't think that my parents' scenario is all that rare. They're clueless about taxes and yet, here they are, somehow paying into Social Security. Frankly, if they knew that paying into SS couldn't be done, I doubt they would have put much effort into finding loopholes in order to pay into it; they would have just deemed that it was outside of their control.

Plenty of other clueless-about-taxes undocumented workers could somehow be paying into SS as well... As you've pasted, "The Social Security Administration estimates that about three-quarters of illegal workers pay taxes that contribute to the overall solvency of Social Security and Medicare." So, somehow, they're doing it.

If your parents are having someone fill out their taxes for them, then they are filing F1040 along with the required additional forms for being Independent Contractors/small business owners. So, they are paying Federal Taxes along with their State Taxes. It is not rare for those here to pay the way your parents and Prerna are, but by no means are they doing as Prerna has implied: undocumented immigrants who continue to keep social security solvent.

Some are paying into the system, "they contribute" a small amount which is less than 1% of the yearly Federal Payment yet they make up approximately 10% of the workforce just in California. They pay Federal and State taxes if they are employed by a business and receive a paycheck. They can also receive refunds at the end of the year from the State and Federal Governments as well by filing their taxes, which can reduce the taxes brought in by the Government, pretty much nullifying any benefits they may add to other Social Services supplied by the Governments.

Liquid I see we're all regrouping after a short vacation, and you're talking out your butt hole again.  Here's from 1st or 2nd thread, and no I haven't bothered reading what followed.  Why bother, no one reads my web site, I send it  everywhere in New Jersey (the gubernatorial cand.)

"and don't attempt to think the ITIN will cover it as that comes back as a letter of no match from SS based on an I-9."

here's a little taste of Mexico

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkK9uO470vI

Sorry Gary, but your 2 cents isn't enough to buy in at this table. Since I am talking out of my butt, please explain to everyone how an ITIN can be used on the employers I-9 form? And if by some miraculous miracle you can explain it, then explain how it does not come back as a no match letter.

Thanks for the money, you can find it in the garbage can where you got it from to begin with.

Ahh, sorry for all of the missing, misused and misplaced words. I posted without reading it over. I wish Change.org would let me edit my comments. Grammatical errors drive me crazy.

Do not worry about it. It is easier to misspell a word when one does not exclusively cuts-and-pastes like some here do.

Lol, Pete you are amazing and hilarious.

So amazing, Peter, yes so amazing..... Wow. Now I ask you to prove any of it wrong, for which we both know you can't. Facts are facts. And in most cases you couldn't get the facts right and contradicted yourself, so in turn you attempt to belittle others for your own ignorance. Now go back to your litter box and play with your sand.

Oh, and Peter, the part about my wife as my source is actually the last paragraph of that comment, we both know you have no comprehension ability when it comes to what is written. Remeber, all you can do is point out misspelled words and use your ignorance as a bully pulpit. That doesn't work on me, but thanks for playing.

Oh Liquid! You accuse everyone of having comprehension issues as a means to try to intimidate people and its ironic that your numerous "characters" you post as seem to insult others in the same exact words. You actually try to question people on their levels of education but you don't even know the basics of psychology like Pavlov's classical conditioning and Maslow's  hierarchy of needs. "That is pretty bad"! Everyone knows who they are.  I wonder if this past and post King made it through High School????

Trying to jump on the band wagon, Mary, after it has left the station, only puts you in the gutter.

Back to Pavlov and Maslow.... I alreay showed you it was not a mandatory class for a degree in College. High School was only mentioned, do I need to go back and post the comments where you admitted you were wrong and I was right? Oh wait, here is the link.

http://immigration.change.org/blog/view/how_immigrants_make_you_safer

Your so right Liquiod! I wouldn't want to join you in the gutter. The train has left the station but you need to get on it and go backwards because it was Mandatory in College. It was a part of your electives.

It is in college electives, as I showed once before in the above link, Psychology 101 was not a mandated prerequisite for my degree. Maslow did come up in the classes I had to take for GE requirements though.

But wait, here is another link from Change, this one not only discusses Maslow, but it also shows where I state I am for Legalization of Immigrants, what do you know, 2 birds, one stone:

http://immigration.change.org/blog/view/gop_struggles_to_understand_civil_rights

And yet another discussion of Maslow on Change:

http://immigration.change.org/blog/view/americans_surprised_that_borders_apply_to_them_too

Sorry, Mary, but you should have quit when you were a head, now your just showing your true inability to have a compelling discussion.

But if Maslow came up in your GE requirements then why did you not know who he was? Did you forget? You always seem to be such an expert on everything.

Im sorry! Did you get a little frazzled in the middle of your compelling discussion that as always picks apart the "undocumented"? Did you get off track?

I will show my true inability here tonight and allow Prena and DK post because they are knowlegeable on this subject and I am also secure enough within myself that I can admit they know more about it than I do. I will just continue to watch the show down.

Can you admit that they are smarter than you Liquiod? These are very brillant ladys and they are giving you a run for it!!! LOL

Where was it that I said I didn't know who Maslow was? I gave the links above, please post the comment.

Its not about being smarter than anyone else, its simply pointing out the little white lies you advocates use to make people garner sympathy and empathy for those you advocate granting all our rights to when they don't deserve them. As I linked to above, by giving them non-immigrant visas, it puts them into legalization status with limited rights. There future is then again theirs to forge. They can at that point apply for AOS, if they so desire to become LPR's/GC holders and possible future citizens.

If they gave me such a run for it, why did I have to point out to DK that her parents are in fact paying Federal Taxes? Maybe you should start giving credit where credit is due. Maybe you should also argue the points that are brought up instead of trying to discredit the person. In fact, I challenge you to start doing that, if you think you can.

You know me by now. I give you no links. none. No copys and No pastes. Im just not into that.

I will give you credit about lightening up though and wanting to allow them to have non-immigrant visas to put them into legal status with limited rights. I am wondering why you lightened up though. What is your agenda? There was a point not long ago you wanting to throw them all out. Why a change of heart?

Maybe that's some of the problem you have, no links, means you attempt to argue with your memory, and that can have consequences, especially when you rely on your memory, and it's wrong.

As for giving legal status to those here, I have argued for this since 2006, on MATT.org. Ask Dee about it or I can go back into MATT's cached pages and pull it up. I have never at any point wanted to throw them all out, I guarantee you can not find any comment by me saying to throw them all out either.

The best way to explain my comments is crticism for painting with a broad brush, to much generalization. Always remember the devil is in the details. I have no agenda other than getting the truth out there, nothing implied, no half truths, no empathy, no sympathy, just the truth.

Who is to say that an opinion is not equally as important as googled facts. I do not care if I make a mistake. Why do you care about that anyway? Its not a big deal.

I prefer to argue with my own ideas. I do not believe in following what is in black and white. I think way differently then you and have different ideas of what "values".

I do remember you commenting saying that you wanted them to have legal status with something like 30 days to pack up and I though that was an insaine idea. Like 11.8 million are really going to pack there bags and leave knowing they have no way to re-enter. Hello?

You were posting that amongst other ideas you had about supporting "Hitler" which was really gross.

(Always remember the devil is in the details)

I really don't believe in the devil anymore than I believe in Santa Claus and considering that you have no half truths, no empathy, and no sympathy...you have pointed out that you are an emotionless person and that is why you have no creativity in your writing style and that is so boring.

Mary...excellent!  And I would add that Liquid should go put an egg in his shoe and beat it!

"Like 11.8 million are really going to pack there bags and leave knowing they have no way to re-enter. Hello?"  That's right on.  Exactly right.

As usual Mary, you've missed the train. Words have meanings, and if you make an implication that has an effect on what you are stating. As far as arguing with your ideas, that's all well and fine, except when others don't agree with your ideas, then you attempt to denigrate them as above, remember the train has already left the area, you were not on it.

The rest of your blather is just that, your lack of following the conversation.

And Gary, I can always count on you to give me your 2 cents. So how is that campaign going? Not so good, I know it's so hard for you to obtain 2 cents, but you need to realize, nobody cares about what you have to say. Maybe instead of thinking Mary knows what she is talking about, you might want to point to my statements of what it is she thinks she thought I have said, and when you can't find those statements, maybe then you could actually think for yourself.

Reigns, my you're so spiteful?  As for the campaign, I have lots of time yet.  Hmmm, about 12 days.  More then enough time for what I need to get out of it.

When I think of campaigning and campaign music, I think of this song and the great Al Damato from New York.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqrKejQTynk

I only pointed out your flaws in your arguments, you know, all your own contradictions, your responses were less than steller. So what was it you did, thats right, you deleted my comments because they made you look ignorant on your own blog. Way to hide the truth and promote your own racism based on your ignorance. You were a big disapointment although you did give me alot to write about on my blog.

Nope, those comments that were deleted were so unappropriate. They did not belong on change.org

A moderator has to moderate to make sure the blog is not sabotaged by a troll.

As usual Mary, you have no idea what you speak of. The comments I referred to where comments I left on IX's blog, he deleted them and then would not post them anymore, its also why he now uses moderation with his comments. Now maybe you will quit with attempting to make me out to be something you are so afraid of, the bogeyman.

"The bogeyman"?? lol

Wade,

Make your cousin sees an immigration lawyer ASAP! http://www.ailalawyer.com/ There's a high possibility that she could fall under the U visa because she is in an abusive relationship.

http://dreamact.info/forum/showthread.php?t=6310  :

"In order to qualify for the U visa, you have to have been a victim of a crime in the US or a crime outside the US that violated US law, and you have to be able and willing to provide US officials with information regarding this crime."

"Here are some of the crimes which qualify you for U visa status:

'rape; torture; trafficking; incest; domestic violence; sexual assault; abusive sexual contact; prostitution; sexual exploitation; female genital mutilation; being held hostage; peonage; involuntary servitude; slave trade; kidnapping; abduction; unlawful criminal restraint; false imprisonment; blackmail; extortion; manslaughter; murder; felonious assault; witness tampering; obstruction of justice; perjury; or attempt, conspiracy, or solicitation to commit any of the above mentioned crimes.'"

Her child can petition her only when he/she turns 21-years of age. So, the U visa is her best bet. "There is a 10,000 limit on U visa beneficiaries each year (not including spouse/child/etc of benificiary), but if you apply you will be put on a wait list and receive a stay of removal." I wish her all the best.

Good advice DK.

Remember Wade, that to qualify for U-visa, person has to report the crime to the police. Many times, victims in abusive relationships are unwilling to come forward--it's a sensitive issue.

She can also qualify for cancellation of removal as a last resort option. But try U-visa first and consult with a good AILA attorney.