montster Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 I do not have the time to read upthread and link this message to the proper quotes. My feeling is that if you are in the United States legally and look like a targeted group - name the group - Hispanic, Muslim, etc. - you should be proud to turn over your documentation to the authority questioning you and thank them for keeping YOUR country safe. If you have a problem with that, I would prefer that you just leave. Go back where you came from. There is no other way to do this. All the borders should be closed. Fenced. Everyone crossing should be questioned. Period. Those legally here need to man up and not be so offended by questioning. what about the folks who look like the "real" americans, but, you know, are wily and like to hide in plain sight? if only we could easily identify them, like maybe with a special patch, adorned with -- and i'm just thinking off the top of my head, here -- some distinctive hexagram-shaped design. that would be great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 I do not have the time to read upthread and link this message to the proper quotes. My feeling is that if you are in the United States legally and look like a targeted group - name the group - Hispanic, Muslim, etc. - you should be proud to turn over your documentation to the authority questioning you and thank them for keeping YOUR country safe. If you have a problem with that, I would prefer that you just leave. Go back where you came from. There is no other way to do this. All the borders should be closed. Fenced. Everyone crossing should be questioned. Period. Those legally here need to man up and not be so offended by questioning. its bad enough that Mexicans already have the 'lazy' moniker - now we're going make them late to everything and ask them to say 'thank you' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 My feeling is that if you are in the United States legally and look like a targeted group - name the group - Hispanic, Muslim, etc. - you should be proud to turn over your documentation to the authority questioning you and thank them for keeping YOUR country safe. If you have a problem with that, I would prefer that you just leave. Go back where you came from. What if where they came from was the United States? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted April 30, 2010 Author Share Posted April 30, 2010 Wow. I guess the Japanese Americans should have been proud to serve their time in those internment camps too. FDR was a great man, or so my liberal friends tell me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted April 30, 2010 Author Share Posted April 30, 2010 You mean the part of the Constitution that says that all persons born in the US are US citizens? I thought you were a big fan of the Constitution. You quoted the Constitution truly. Amendments and opinions have declared all that are born here as simply "citizens." Perhaps you should be so diligent as to who is a "Natural Born Citizen." I dare you. Weigie, could you please quote the portion of the Constitution you believe covers anchor babies? I believe Lady.hawke has it right. I'm pretty sure it wasn't until the Hart-Cellar Act of 1965 that the children of illegals born on our soil began to be recognized as citizens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted April 30, 2010 Author Share Posted April 30, 2010 its bad enough that Mexicans already have the 'lazy' moniker - now we're going make them late to everything and ask them to say 'thank you' 1st generation mexican-americans are anything but lazy. They are some of the hardest working people you will ever meet. It is their kids that become dependent on our social programs and get an entitlement mentality that are viewed as lazy, though even they are no more lazy than anyone else with an entitlement mentality. The biggest problem with them is their lack of desire to assimilate. Rather than wanting to become part of the melting pot they want to keep their separate culture and language, which ends up costing us all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 What if where they came from was the United States? Kinda like those of Irish lineage in my eyes... once you got that dirty Irish blood in your system, you're still a dirty Irishman... And, in regard to another post. Mexicans are NOT LAZY. I'll hire a legal Mexican as a laborer any day of the week over some methed out cracker... Hell, I'm of the opinion that most of the foreigners over here, who have immigrated recently, are more industrious and quite often brighter than their American counterparts. I have no problem with immigrants, just illegals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SayItAintSoJoe Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 You had me at aglommerate. I never know when you're agreeing with me or being condescending... And, honestly, I like that. Actually I was going to give an extensive reply to your post but I was pressed for time so I just took a quick shot humor. I got some more time today but after watching a couple of more news shows on the topic last night and reading some more posts here this morning I'm kind of getting burnt out on the whole topic. I guess I'll just sit back and watch for a while. BTW, I wonder if those illiegals are still even in that rental property? Or has this thread outlived their protest? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted April 30, 2010 Author Share Posted April 30, 2010 BTW, I wonder if those illiegals are still even in that rental property? Or has this thread outlived their protest? I don't know, but I'd be willing to bet the rental property isn't in as good of condition as before they started trespassing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 And so it begins . . . The guy provided his commercial drivers license and social security number. That wasnt good enough so his wife had to leave work to get his birth certificate to get him released from jail. So everyone has to carry their birth certificate at all times . . . . how amusing. (cant wait for Lady Hawke's inevitable nonsensical rant . . . ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 And so it begins . . . The guy provided his commercial drivers license and social security number. That wasnt good enough so his wife had to leave work to get his birth certificate to get him released from jail. So everyone has to carry their birth certificate at all times . . . . how amusing. (cant wait for Lady Hawke's inevitable nonsensical rant . . . ) And the law is not supposed to come into effect until 90 days after the end of the legislative session. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 And the law is not supposed to come into effect until 90 days after the end of the legislative session. even better . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 I thought you were a big fan of the Constitution. Only under certain circumstances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 Weigie, could you please quote the portion of the Constitution you believe covers anchor babies? I believe Lady.hawke has it right. I'm pretty sure it wasn't until the Hart-Cellar Act of 1965 that the children of illegals born on our soil began to be recognized as citizens. Wrong. It's in the constitution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted May 1, 2010 Author Share Posted May 1, 2010 Wrong. It's in the constitution. Where? Careful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady.hawke Posted May 1, 2010 Share Posted May 1, 2010 Where to begin? I am not sure this is worth a substantive reply. Here I go: I live in California. My best friend was born in Mexico. He has an amazing story - not going to recite it here - but he was recently commended by the state legislature. He gets targeted all the time. I have not - never have - said that is right, but that I understand it. My friend accepts that fate as being an American citizen at this time. He happily produces his driver's license and thanks the cop for keeping America safe. That is my point. Unless members of a targeted group - as my friend - realize that they are the good guys in a targeted group that has a small subset of really bad guys - put up with some inconvenience - nothing will change. I have adopted his attitude. I have to show ID all the time. To travel, to use a credit card. Why is everyone so upset? Regarding The Constitution: It says that you only have to be a "citizen" to be a member of Congress. Likewise, you have to be a "natural born citizen" to be President, AND ONLY for President. Clearly, the founding fathers discerned a difference. I call upon Wiegie to enlighten us as to the difference. He has ridiculed me unrelentingly for pointing this out, so he must have the answer. We are waiting with bated breath. Do give us the explanation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted May 1, 2010 Share Posted May 1, 2010 Why is everyone so upset? Is this one of those trick questions? Who is becoming upset exactly? I've been paying attention to this for decades and somewhat entertained it's become a popular right wing talking point over the last few weeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted May 1, 2010 Share Posted May 1, 2010 Regarding The Constitution: It says that you only have to be a "citizen" to be a member of Congress. Likewise, you have to be a "natural born citizen" to be President, AND ONLY for President. Clearly, the founding fathers discerned a difference. I call upon Wiegie to enlighten us as to the difference. He has ridiculed me unrelentingly for pointing this out, so he must have the answer. We are waiting with bated breath. Do give us the explanation. Here is an example: A co-worker of mine was born in India, she moved to the US about 15 years ago and became a US citizen a few years ago--she can not become president. My son was born in the United States and was a citizen at birth--he can become president. Was that really so hard? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted May 1, 2010 Share Posted May 1, 2010 Where to begin? I am not sure this is worth a substantive reply. Here I go: I live in California. My best friend was born in Mexico. He has an amazing story - not going to recite it here - but he was recently commended by the state legislature. He gets targeted all the time. I have not - never have - said that is right, but that I understand it. My friend accepts that fate as being an American citizen at this time. He happily produces his driver's license and thanks the cop for keeping America safe. That is my point. Unless members of a targeted group - as my friend - realize that they are the good guys in a targeted group that has a small subset of really bad guys - put up with some inconvenience - nothing will change. I have adopted his attitude. I have to show ID all the time. To travel, to use a credit card. Why is everyone so upset? Regarding The Constitution: It says that you only have to be a "citizen" to be a member of Congress. Likewise, you have to be a "natural born citizen" to be President, AND ONLY for President. Clearly, the founding fathers discerned a difference. I call upon Wiegie to enlighten us as to the difference. He has ridiculed me unrelentingly for pointing this out, so he must have the answer. We are waiting with bated breath. Do give us the explanation. you REALLY need to read the article about the guy that was handcuffed and arrested AFTER HE PROVIDED A VALID AND LEGITIMATE DRIVERS LICENSE. Would your friend feel the same (or you for that matter) if you were detained until your birth certificate was provided? cant believe I fell for the crazy expedition . . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady.hawke Posted May 2, 2010 Share Posted May 2, 2010 Here is an example: A co-worker of mine was born in India, she moved to the US about 15 years ago and became a US citizen a few years ago--she can not become president. My son was born in the United States and was a citizen at birth--he can become president. Was that really so hard? If I had a kid taking your class I would pull them instantly and demand my money back. There is nothing logical about your response. I asked for your clarification PER THE CONSTITUTION, regarding the difference between a citizen and a natural born citizen. Both of your examples constituted citizens. I assume that you can read, so how about you read the document, the Federalist Papers, the supporting works and get back to us. Perch is correct in his question about anchor babies - which you conveniently ignored. If you son is eligilble to be POTUS, so are all the anchor babies. So is the spawn of Hitler born of anyone in the Lincoln bedroom. Not one of the Founding Fathers would have agreed with you. Why is this so hard for you to understand? There is a citizenship difference, that only matters for those aspiring to be POTUS . A modicum of research would enlighten you. You are wrong on this issue. Your kid can be a Senator, so can your friend, but neither will ever be President. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted May 2, 2010 Share Posted May 2, 2010 If I had a kid taking your class I would pull them instantly and demand my money back. He teaches adults. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady.hawke Posted May 2, 2010 Share Posted May 2, 2010 He teaches adults. LOL. My kids are adults. Your point would be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted May 2, 2010 Share Posted May 2, 2010 Perch is correct Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montster Posted May 2, 2010 Share Posted May 2, 2010 Where to begin? I am not sure this is worth a substantive reply. Here I go: I live in California. My best friend was born in Mexico. He has an amazing story - not going to recite it here - but he was recently commended by the state legislature. He gets targeted all the time. I have not - never have - said that is right, but that I understand it. My friend accepts that fate as being an American citizen at this time. He happily produces his driver's license and thanks the cop for keeping America safe. That is my point. Unless members of a targeted group - as my friend - realize that they are the good guys in a targeted group that has a small subset of really bad guys - put up with some inconvenience - nothing will change. I have adopted his attitude. I have to show ID all the time. To travel, to use a credit card. Why is everyone so upset? Regarding The Constitution: It says that you only have to be a "citizen" to be a member of Congress. Likewise, you have to be a "natural born citizen" to be President, AND ONLY for President. Clearly, the founding fathers discerned a difference. I call upon Wiegie to enlighten us as to the difference. He has ridiculed me unrelentingly for pointing this out, so he must have the answer. We are waiting with bated breath. Do give us the explanation. several people have brought up the "i have to show ID all the time" argument. that is not the issue. when i go through airport security, the screeners stop everyone -- not just the white folks, the browns ones, the muslim ones, but everyone. if i have a problem with that, then i don't fly. same thing with a credit card -- if i have a problem showing my ID, then i can just use cash. the issue is that this "policy" applies to only select, targeted groups of people -- which you yourself admit to having misgivings about. this is not an issue of putting up with "inconvenience," it's about not having a say in the matter, simply because of how you look. it's not an issue of a "small subset" of a group breaking the law, it's about defining the entire group by the actions of that small subset -- and then somehow rationalizing that this is acceptable. if that's how your friend feels, then i feel sorry for him. and if that's the only way change can occur, then it's not worth it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montster Posted May 2, 2010 Share Posted May 2, 2010 If I had a kid taking your class I would pull them instantly and demand my money back. There is nothing logical about your response. I asked for your clarification PER THE CONSTITUTION, regarding the difference between a citizen and a natural born citizen. Both of your examples constituted citizens. I assume that you can read, so how about you read the document, the Federalist Papers, the supporting works and get back to us. Perch is correct in his question about anchor babies - which you conveniently ignored. If you son is eligilble to be POTUS, so are all the anchor babies. So is the spawn of Hitler born of anyone in the Lincoln bedroom. Not one of the Founding Fathers would have agreed with you. Why is this so hard for you to understand? There is a citizenship difference, that only matters for those aspiring to be POTUS . A modicum of research would enlighten you. You are wrong on this issue. Your kid can be a Senator, so can your friend, but neither will ever be President. where in the constitution does it define "natural born citizen"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.