L. Carrier: Check my box as disgusted

According to the Census Bureau of the Center for Immigration and noted by Rush Limbaugh, 57 percent of all Mexican immigrant families receive welfare benefits. That does not take into account any other benefits. The notion that immigrants who come to America illegally for opportunities to work is ridiculous, left-wing propaganda.

Why would Democrats perpetuate such lies? I believe it is because many of those immigrants will vote Democratic once legalized, thus ending any hopes of a conservative winning an elected office.

That will lead to the destruction of this nation as we know it. I can see it is on that path now.

That brings up the obvious question: why do Republicans support such a move? It defies common sense.

According to something I heard on the the Laura Ingraham radio show, illegal immigrants cost Americans $1,117 per household — something we cannot afford.

Some proponents of legalization and citizenship (voting rights) tout statistics showing many of those immigrants pay taxes. Make no mistake, the burden of those collecting benefits far outweighs any contribution. Hospitals hire bilingual staff to assist a new mother to obtain benefits after birth. Rush Limbaugh claims that they go straight from the hospital to the welfare office.

I am fed up with people who will not work and then take my tax dollars to live a life free of the stress from everyday burdens of supporting themselves like the rest of us. Most people who work are struggling to keep themselves out of bankruptcy.

Larry Carrier, Sabattus

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

In order to make comments, you must create a subscription.

In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must hold a valid subscription allowing access to this website. You must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your SunJournal.com profile. To subscribe or link your existing subscription click here.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.

Advertisement

Comments

Jeff Johnson's picture

Historical immigration waves...

I'm rather flummoxed as to why no one is bringing up other immigration waves... Nationally: The Irish. Locally: The Canadian French.

If you'll remember, there were no welfare programs at the time, and these two groups either had to have a job or a sponsor before they were allowed to migrate.

The problem isn't the folks wanting to come to the United States for a better life. The problem is the simplicity and ease of obtaining benefits. It's easier for an illegal immigrant (Key Word: Illegal) to get benefits such as food support and section 8 housing than a legal U. S. citizen.

There's no easy solution... but there are some tough ones: No benefits for you and your family until you have gained your citizenship. Sorry, that doesn't include your "Anchor Baby". If you are already in the country, you have one year to gain your citizenship, or lose your benefits.

I don't begrudge anyone the opportunity to better their lives... but it should involve a little more planning, work, and achievement before it is just given to them.

Citizen ship should be a privilege, and the benefits part of the privilege. Benefits are not a right for anyone who can break into a country illegally.

Picture this... someone just walks into your home, and expects you to feed, clothe, and entertain them. The police do nothing. How long would you support them before demanding they either get out, or support themselves? (Parents... how about those college kids coming home now?)

MARK GRAVEL's picture

After 20 years of debating

After 20 years of debating illegal immigration why don’t we have answers to the following basic questions?

1. How many illegal immigrants are in this country – we don’t know.
2. How many illegal immigrants in this country are educated – we don’t know.
3. How many illegal immigrants in this country have a high-school education – we don’t know.
4. How many illegal immigrants in this country have jobs – we don’t know.
5. How many illegal immigrants in this country have skills, what are those skills – we don’t know.
6. How many illegal immigrants in this country don’t have jobs – we don’t know.
7. How many illegal immigrants in this country pay taxes and how much – we don’t know.
8. What is the true cost of illegal immigration to the taxpayer – we don’t know.
9. Is it true that illegal immigrants take jobs that Americans will not do – we don’t know.
10. How many illegal immigrants are on welfare – we don’t know.

How in the hell does this government think it can have an intelligent discussion on illegal immigration when it cannot answer basic questions that have been lingering for decades?

I don't know!

CLAIRE GAMACHE's picture

I know

I think the way to find out would be to offer amnesty and a path to citizenship. Then they wouldn't have to hide. There is also the issue of the children of illegal immigrants that were born in this country or have been here since their first memory. What would be the point of sending them to a country where they don't speak the language or have any culture in common. And what is the point of splitting up families and sending some of them back and leaving some here.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Claire, Another fallacy is

Claire,

Another fallacy is thinking the only impediment to assimilation is there immigration status.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

there --> their

there --> their

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Given your idea, we are

Given your idea, we are assuming that everyone will come forth and be counted. Not everyone will come forth.

Furthermore, it does nothing to address the next wave if illegal immigration, and we’ll be back in the same spot again.

The government cannot stem illegal immigration today, what makes me think tomorrow will be any different. Amnesty is just furthering the incentive to illegal immigration. The golden ring that everyone who comes here illegally hopes to grab. Waving the magic wand of amnesty does not fix the problem.

CLAIRE GAMACHE's picture

Work

The notion that immigrants do not work is the most ridiculous statement I have heard in years. Nearly every bite of food we put in our mouths was planted, harvested, butchered, packed, canned, cooked and hauled by immigrants. Hotels use immigrants in their cleaning, cooking and landscaping crews, In the South nearly all construction, landscaping and fishing is done by immigrants. In Maine, apples, blueberries, and potatoes are picked by immigrants. A solid percentage of enterprenerial businesses in Maine are run by immigrants. Besides that most American tech services are manned by immigrants and many of our hospital personnel are immigrant doctors and nurses. Not only do they work but they work harder and for less money, especially if they are illegals, than anybody else. You might look at who makes the clothing labeled Made in America. That is the real reason Republicans are not about to make them citizens nor to send them home.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

“The notion that immigrants

“The notion that immigrants do not work is the most ridiculous statement I have heard in years.”

Who is saying that? One can be employed and still take government welfare.

The current debate in Washington is focused on illegal immigrants, not just immigrants, which include those here legally and illegally.

Be precise, there is a difference.

Mark Wrenn's picture

Beck

Geez, why not cite Glenn Beck, too?

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Why not listen to the

Why not listen to the message, analyze the message, and critique the message rather than dismiss the messenger.

You are never going to learn anything if you just listen to the talking head pushing your own political agenda.

Bob Woodbury's picture

Please...

...consider the source.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Use the scientific method –

Use the scientific method – analyze the message. Remove your emotion for the messenger.

Bob Woodbury's picture

Why?

Why?

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Perhaps an opportunity to

Perhaps an opportunity to demonstrate maturity? Just one thought.

Bob Woodbury's picture

Good idea.

Do that.

FRANK EARLEY's picture

Hey Larry.........

You have to stop listening to so much talk radio. Take it from an ex trucker, I've seen people commit road rage listening to Rush Limbaugh. Hell even I was forced to the brink of insanity during a segment of the Dr. Laura show once. Help is available out there, if you are willing to accept it.......

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Nice, but off topic.

Nice, but off topic.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Neither of them has anything

Neither of them has anything tangible to offer so they sling mud.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Yet they ask tangible things

Yet they ask tangible things from us - our money.

FRANK EARLEY's picture

Nice, but if you concider the source................

This is totally on topic. If someone, anyone addresses any subject, and uses "Talk Radio" as a source of their anger, they listen to hard. Talk radio first and foremost was intended to be entertainment. Even that loveable Rush fella, at one time many years ago used to state his show was entertainment. Then he actually started believing his own garbage. It seems that after his drug addiction he must have gotten some sort of right wing religion or something.
People have to remember one thing, talk radio shouldn't be your sole source of information. The most liberal, and conservative talk show hosts on the air, are there for one reason, RATINGS. To get ratings one has to be entertaining. To be entertaining you need to be outrageous. It's when people start to believe the outrageous content of these talk show host's, we get anger. Thus, some people are bent all out of shape from listening to the radio. If you don't believe me, ask a "Ditto Head"..........

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

All this from one who really

All this from one who really 'knows', right?

FRANK EARLEY's picture

Had no choice.......

They wouldn't let me mount a TV on my dash, so radio was all I had. Unless you can count all the people driving by my truck doing all sorts of weird things while they drive. The further south you go the more entertaining the traffic.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Man, I gotta give you 20

Man, I gotta give you 20 'agrees' on that one. If I knew you better, I could tell you a couple of good stories about our second trip to Key West.

FRANK EARLEY's picture

Hey, speaking of agrees.............

How come they changed the program here? This isn't as much fun if you can't agree or disagree with someone. I hope this is just a temporary thing. I hate unannounced changes..............

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Some of the

Some of the 'non-conservative' participants have expressed their displeasure at posters being able to express disagreement with a post without identifying themselves and I guess they took offense to it. Apparently, enough of them complained so that the Journal caved to their requests.The left rules, Frank. No two ways about it.

FRANK EARLEY's picture

I say we fight....

What do you think our odds would be in a counter complaint? It was bad enough when they took away our tally sheet. Knowing how many agrees and disagrees one received kind of allowed us to see where we stood. Now we can't even tell if we resonate with the other posters out there. Bottom line is I enjoy knowing if I am upsetting someone or not, it lets me know sort of which direction to go. I'm going to write to the editor about this one. Wait, I think I just did.......

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Count me in. I'm pretty sure

Count me in. I'm pretty sure I can get the parrot to go along with it, too. After all, I feed him.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Frank, it is not fair that

Frank, it is not fair that you get more negative kudos than someone else does. We now have kudo equality.

FRANK EARLEY's picture

Equality may be fine for certain things......

But damn it, if I have more negative Kudo's, Hell I earned them fair and square..........

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Some times one just doesn't

Some times one just doesn't feel like getting into it with an adversary over an absurd or idiotic post and the agree or disagree button fills that void quite nicely. There are a few who would much rather bully their way through on every issue, no matter what. There is no doubt that the SUN JOURNAL SHOULD RECONSIDER their removal of the magic buttons.

FRANK EARLEY's picture

I agree, I also noticed something else different...........

I never know if it's just me or what, but there seems to be some very hot topics I'd like to comment on, but can't. There is no comment box. I think if Ms. Reeves would like to keep it fair, maybe we should have had some say in it.. I can't believe someone complaining over to many negative kudos is to blame for this. If someone doesn't like whats being said, or how it's said, they should bring it up for discussion, not just deny us the right to express our views. If they don't resume the "Kudos" option, I'm out of here. It just feels like someones a little queezy with negative feedback, and boy are they in the wrong place if that"s whats bothering them...........

MARK GRAVEL's picture

It is not fair that you have

It is not fair that you have more kudos; you need to give up your fair share.

FRANK EARLEY's picture

If this keeps up..............

If the kudos option isn't resumed real soon I'll be having myself a kudos liquidation sale, I'll have to check the "Craig's List" for pricing, Check back later for the best prices. Hurry while there are still plenty of kudos to be had, they won't last long.........

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Yet I thought the topic was

Yet I thought the topic was illegal immigration, not talk radio. Pardon me.

You're missing the point. Again.

Frank's point is clear: before we talk about immigration as seen by this letter writer, we must address where he's hearing these things, and every claim he makes comes from one of the right-wing bloviators who play fast and loose with the facts. I looked up that 57% claim. Not a single credible source corroborates it. I only find mentioned on right wing blowhard sites. The official sounding Center for Immigration Studies that is the source from this claim is a right wing anti-immigration group, so the claim is not credible.

So Frank's point (and mine) is this: if you want to talk about immigration, lets try finding the actual facts first. If you rely on partisan sources that have a record of lying or stretching the truth, then we have nothing to discuss.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

In reading your post one is

In reading your post one is inclined to conclude that your belief is that only information coming from the left is credible, which is also laughable in and of itself. Is that what you are saying?

Couldn't be further from the truth

"Facts" from Maddow, Michael Moore (especially) and blogs such as the Daily Kos and Upworthy are equally suspect. I never take ANY claim from any partisan source as fact unless it can be corroborated by an UNbiased source. I tried looking up the 57% claim and found it verified only by other blogs ad sites in the right wing echo chamber. Therefore, the letter's claims lacked facts. So, lets address where the writer was getting those non-facts and suggest maybe he should verify before repeating them. Repeating falsehoods verbatim without questioning does, in fact, indict the messenger, because if the messenger is untrustworthy, then the message cannot be trusted.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Is that why so many

Is that why so many 'messengers' are being shot?

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Fifty-seven percent

Fifty-seven percent immigrants on welfare - http://cis.org/immigrant-welfare-use-2011

Note that the above statement means all immigrants, legal and illegal, and from a variety of countries. There are plenty of citations for you to followup on before you summarily dismiss the data because it may not confirm to your belief or feelings.

I said credible source...

I read that already, back before I even entered this discussion because I did not want to call shenanigans on the writer's claims without verifying them. CIS is an organization dedicated to the reduction of all immigration overall, so any report from them without independent corroboration cannot be considered credible or unbiased, no matter how may statistics the cherry-pick from other surveys and reports (interestingly, the author cites a number of other CIS reports. Nice bubble.)

I found no verification of this report anywhere on the net, just a lot of ditto-heads repeating it.

Zack Lenhert's picture

...you should re-read the

...you should re-read the post. It claims nothing of the sort.

Zack Lenhert's picture

"if you want to talk about

"if you want to talk about immigration, lets try finding the actual facts first"

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Bingo

The tolerent left does not want to be bothered with opposing points of view.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

So let me paraphrase your

So let me paraphrase your message. Before we listen to the message, we have to evaluate the messenger?

I think you really mean verify the facts. To shut your ears based on the massager is being closed minded.

To talk about the messenger instead of discussing the validity of the message is a waste of white space in my opinion.

As you pointed out you want to crosscheck the claim from independent sources; the original messenger is inconsequential.
If you want to talk about the facts, why so much text on the messenger. Just state the claim and discuss its validity. Oh, unless you don’t have the facts and you wish discredit the message, you what – attack the messenger. That is what Frank’s actions.

Here is an example of talking about the your claims without discussing the messenger:

The fact about the number of illegal immigrants on welfare is truly unknown because the US does not keep nor collect those statistics. Moreover, it depends on how one defines welfare. Let’s say for example if an illegal immigrant has a child they place in the public school system. While that is not what we traditionally think of as welfare, it can be viewed as suckling at the taxpayers’ teat nonetheless.

FRANK EARLEY's picture

Two more points to make....

My statements regarding Talk Radio were made because the letter writer stated his information was based on two well known talk radio host's. I have listened to both of them for years, I've listened to most everything on the air, because it prevents insanity. I don't generally agree with either one or any of them due to the fact that like a lot of things, it's biased and very sketchy information at best. It's meant for entertainment, a couple of these program hosts have attracted a large following, (Ditto Heads), I have no problem with that, but you can't base fact on the quest for ratings.
Truck drivers, for obvious reasons, listen to a lot of talk radio. I have seen guy's duking it out in a truck stop parking lot, over something Rush Limbaugh said. to me thats akin to me getting into a fight over Jay Leno's monologue. There's a lot of print material, if you learn to trust certain sources to get much more accurate information.
As for the immigration issue itself, I have this huge concern for the people involved. I have been to Mexico many times. Usually delivering materiel to American owned companies. My concerns with immigration, are based on the culture down there. It raises to me anyway, a lot of questions. Yes there are a lot of people on welfare, but are all these people here by their own accord. If a husband tells his wife and five kids, we're going to the promised land for a better way of life, even if the wife and kids don't want to go, who do we blame? The wife and kids are now here, the father may have dropped out of the picture. That mother has only one job in her mind, finding help for her children. Any way she can get it. To me that mother is no different than any other mother in the world. They are in an unfamiliar place and need to survive. You can't blame them any more than a mother born in this country who finds herself in the same situation.
Yes we need immigration reform, but go after the root cause of the problem, not the collateral.................

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Isn’t the root cause of

Isn’t the root cause of illegal immigration tied to benefits that American people provide?

If life would be no better here, then why come. Until America removes incentives to migrate here illegally, such as welfare, education, healthcare, no amount of enforcement will stop migration.

Couple that with decades of structural government debt, and it is not too hard to draw the conclusion that the US is broke and must cut budgets somewhere.

Cutting benefits to illegal immigrants is only one place to start.

FRANK EARLEY's picture

That may be the case........

What I'm referring to is the women and children that are here now, Yes there is a problem, Maybe the benefits are to tempting, but what I've seen, and people I have spoken to over the years. Not to mention what I've seen with my own two eye's, indicate that we would need to drop the standard of living in this country way down. In order for us to make it, just not worth the effort, we would need a much, much higher unemployment rate, we have way to much suitable housing, and we would need to corrupt about half the police forces in this country. If you think welfare is the only thing their looking for, go visit a few little towns down south of Mexico City. It's an eye opener.....

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Another thought to ponder:

Another thought to ponder:

Ask yourself why Mexico is such a miserable place to live. Perhaps that is a function of their culture. Now ask yourself, why do we want to import those cultural attitudes via illegal immigration without checks, balances, and measures?

FRANK EARLEY's picture

Mark, you hit the nail on the head, almost.....

You hit on the whole reason for illegal immigration, a lot of the area is miserable to live in. The law enforcement I saw back in the late seventies was questionable at best. There were whole towns with no employment. no food no water, or very little water. It was just dirty and dry down there. I doubt you could scrape out a living even if you did have any money. There isn't much to buy.
Given all that, do you think welfare is the only reason they come here? This isn't a group moving from one welfare system to a better one, this is coming from nothing to something. Then going from there.
I'm just saying that maybe focusing on welfare, as the only reason for illegal immigration, is why nothing seems to be working. Until that argument is settled, we need to show some compassion to the people who are here for no other reason than they were either forced through family obligation, or otherwise coerced into coming here unwillingly. Not to mention all the children who were born here to undocumented mothers.
Yes, blame needs to be placed where it belongs. Punishing the kids by denying education and food is wrong. They are guilty of nothing more than being kids.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Who is say the attraction is

Who is say the attraction is only welfare?

"Until America removes incentives to migrate here illegally, such as welfare, education, healthcare, no amount of enforcement will stop migration.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

The only reason to attack the

The only reason to attack the messenger is to take focus off the message.

It is far easier to attack the messenger, especially if they are controversial, than to attack the message.

If the messenger is not credible...

then the message is not credible. If the message is not credible, there is little to "discuss" because it will only degenerate into a sad imitation of a Monty Python skit ("No it isn't!" "Yes it is!" etc). Especially when one makes a bold (and entirely unproven and unprovable ) claim such as "57% of illegal immigrants are on welfare!" without providing any credible, unbiased sources.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Wayne, Wayne, Wayne... Given

Wayne, Wayne, Wayne...

Given that you misquoted the original claim perhaps we should put you with the likes of Rush, Glenn, and Obama and summarily dismiss anything you say as a lie. Sound reasonable?

Original Quote:
According to the Census Bureau of the Center for Immigration and noted by Rush Limbaugh, 57 percent of all Mexican immigrant families receive welfare benefits.

Your altered quote:

“..claim such as "57% of illegal immigrants are on welfare!”

So, why should we listen to you when you misrepresent the data?

Wayne, Wayne, Wayne...

The takeaway if you did not git it is that the original quote includes both legal and illegal immigrants. You altered the quote - shame on you.

Mark, Mark, Mark...

Patronizing much? Okay, so I have proven my own point. Which, paradoxically, makes it valid. Yeah, I misquoted. My mistake and I'll own up to it. So aside from being a dick about it. anything else to add?

Mark, Mark, Mark...

Patronizing much? Okay, so I have proven my own point. Which, paradoxically, makes it valid. Yeah, I misquoted. My mistake and I'll own up to it. So aside from being a dick about it. anything else to add?

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Yes, I have something else to

Yes, I have something else to add. We all make mistakes. It is how you handle your mistakes that defines character.

MICHAEL LEBLANC's picture

Some of your readers might dispute the phrase "to the brink of".

Be that as it may, if you want hard-core looney-tunes acorn-academy stuff, listen to left-wing talk radio - if you can find it.

RIP Air America.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Ever listen to Sharpton,

Ever listen to Sharpton, Maddow, or Matthews? It's like taking 3 sleeping pills and a 5 hour energy drink at the same time. Makes you want to sleep and break things simultaneously.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Funny those who lean left

Funny those who lean left find these three pillars of virtue but say Rush, Glenn, and Obama are all liars.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Funny those who lean left

Funny those who lean left find these three pillars of virtue but say Rush, Glenn, and Obama are all liars.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Good letter, Larry. Brace

Good letter, Larry. Brace yourself to have the BOHICA treatment administered to you by the boo birds.

Advertisement

Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...