Immigration Bill: Shumer, Graham Propose National ID Card

This, of course, is the first step. Then they'll come for your guns and you bibles. Then they'll force your daughters to have abortions and your sons to go queer. Then they'll build the trans America highway and install a world government and put a UN trooper on every street corner.

In 2005, Congress passed the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, or REAL ID.

Once again, globalist scum carry both the D and R labels.

Sorry Stirs, I scanned the page to see if this was posted, but somehow missed yours.

"Under the controversial plan taking shape in the Senate, all legal U.S. workers, including citizens and immigrants, would be issued an ID card with embedded information, such as fingerprints, to tie the card to the worker."

I believe we already have something required for all legal citizens who work here, it is called a Social Security card.

Crispy shows why he is the poster child for DR Rtards.

A 5 year old with a set of crayons could fake a Social Security card, you vacuous queef.

#5 crispee
Correct, but the bio ID is so much better! You see, when a SSN card is used in an ID theft, it is difficult to fix your credit [in extreme cases, they have to issue you a new SSN]. Later, when your "fingerprint" card is stolen and used in ID theft, you must replace your fingerprint.

A great thing about being an American is that here in the great US of A we don't have to show our "papers" to anyone. We are not required to carry any identification of any sort. (Obviously paperwork is needed for certain privleged activities such as driving or international travel.) The notion of some Kommisar or fascist police officer demanding our "papers" smacks of dictatorship. In America, a person minding their own business and not hurting anything should not be required to prove who they are or what they are doing simply cuz the government wants to know.

Having said that, I am not offended by appropriate paperwork being required by employers to job applicants. The right to employ someone is a privledge. It is an activity already regulated by tomes full of statutes. Requiring the employer to confirm that the applicant for a job actually is legally entitled to perform the job under US law should not offend anyone.

Funny, I thought the left were against something like this, just like they are against the Patriot Act. Is this some of the change we can believe in?

I thought the left were against something like this, just like they are against the Patriot Act.

Didn't you hear? They aren't against the Patriot Act anymore since it got extended during the Obama administration. Or if they are, they are very quiet about it all of a sudden for some reason.

Crispy shows why he is the poster child for DR Rtards.

A 5 year old with a set of crayons could fake a Social Security card, you vacuous queef.
#6 | Posted by axe at 2010-03-09 11:23 AM

Why am I surprised a tool named Axe, is too stupid to understand we already have things in place, which illegals and employers either forge or get around? Of course this is the same idiot who thinks diabetes is not a preventable disease, and that insuring everyone to pay for emergency care is better than preventing the emergency, so I guess one has to consider the source.

#7 | Posted by L_RContrarian at 2010-03-09 11:51 AM

My point is, we already have E-verify amongst other laws requiring all employers verify status before hiring, sadly many do not and will find a way to get around this as well.