14 States may target birthright citizenship

[phk]

It surely is about race, but it's also about elections. This is nothing more than an electoral security measure by Republicans scared that minorities will ruin their election chances and need an ace in the hole to neutralize votes, especially in Arizona. If these measures passed, they'd be challenging every Hispanic person that shows up at the polls and throw out tons of votes under the premise of the law.

That. If Hispanics were a heavily Republican group then you would see the likes of Tancredo, King and the Arizona guy marginalized inside the Republican party, not made into folk heroes.

So you're saying I don't like Hispanics?

I love it when you guys can't win an argument. It always goes back to racism or sexism or bigotry. There can never be an honest disagreement.

If by racist you mean unwilling to increase the ranks of a Dem-friendly constituency with a lot of new voters thus complicating Republican's electoral math, then yes you are.

and of course if Hispanics voted 70% GOP you'd be racist.....

[Keystone Phil]

It surely is about race, but it's also about elections. This is nothing more than an electoral security measure by Republicans scared that minorities will ruin their election chances and need an ace in the hole to neutralize votes, especially in Arizona. If these measures passed, they'd be challenging every Hispanic person that shows up at the polls and throw out tons of votes under the premise of the law.

That. If Hispanics were a heavily Republican group then you would see the likes of Tancredo, King and the Arizona guy marginalized inside the Republican party, not made into folk heroes.

So you're saying I don't like Hispanics?

I love it when you guys can't win an argument. It always goes back to racism or sexism or bigotry. There can never be an honest disagreement.

If by racist you mean unwilling to increase the ranks of a Dem-friendly constituency with a lot of new voters thus complicating Republican's electoral math, then yes you are.

You're truly pathetic. Nothing more than a two bit hack.

I'm unwilling to increase the ranks of a Dem friendly constituency when they enter this country illegally. It has nothing to do with electoral politics.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

This thread is full of idiocy. There's no evidence to suggest that any benefit would come from denying the children of illegal immigrants birthright citizenship. All we would be doing is perpetuating the existence of an underclass in this country. Is that really what you guys want? I'm sick of the dichotomy being drawn in this thread that suggests that it is a reward for the child of an illegal immigrant to be granted citizenship. It's the current state of affairs and its been that way since the birth of our nation. It's like suggesting that the right to vote is a reward for turning 18. The real punishment would be to single out a group and deny them the rights granted to everyone in this country for centuries.

[Landslide Lyndon]

You're truly pathetic. Nothing more than a two bit hack.

I'm unwilling to increase the ranks of a Dem friendly constituency when they enter this country illegally. It has nothing to do with electoral politics.

But if they voted Republican then you would be more lenient.

Karl Rove after all admitted that the Bush administration tried to pass immigration reform primarily for electoral reasons.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

It surely is about race, but it's also about elections. This is nothing more than an electoral security measure by Republicans scared that minorities will ruin their election chances and need an ace in the hole to neutralize votes, especially in Arizona. If these measures passed, they'd be challenging every Hispanic person that shows up at the polls and throw out tons of votes under the premise of the law.

That. If Hispanics were a heavily Republican group then you would see the likes of Tancredo, King and the Arizona guy marginalized inside the Republican party, not made into folk heroes.

So you're saying I don't like Hispanics?

I love it when you guys can't win an argument. It always goes back to racism or sexism or bigotry. There can never be an honest disagreement.

If by racist you mean unwilling to increase the ranks of a Dem-friendly constituency with a lot of new voters thus complicating Republican's electoral math, then yes you are.

You're truly pathetic. Nothing more than a two bit hack.

I'm unwilling to increase the ranks of a Dem friendly constituency when they enter this country illegally. It has nothing to do with electoral politics.

Do you support the dry foot policy with regards to Cuba? If so, why do you think they should receive different treatment from our government in comparison to illegal immigrants from say Venezuela? 

[Keystone Phil]

The real punishment would be to single out a group and deny them the rights granted to everyone in this country for centuries.

Enough with the constant victimization. The only people being singled out would be people that enter the country illegally. The real victims are the people you never talk about: the people that respect the law, wait their turn and are skipped over by fellow members of that "group."

And, yes, it is a reward to be granted citizenship when your parents aren't citizens.

[Landslide Lyndon]

And, yes, it is a reward to be granted citizenship when your parents aren't citizens.

But the Founding Fathers put it in the Constitution!
How dare you question their wisdom!

[Keystone Phil]

You're truly pathetic. Nothing more than a two bit hack.

I'm unwilling to increase the ranks of a Dem friendly constituency when they enter this country illegally. It has nothing to do with electoral politics.

But if they voted Republican then you would be more lenient.

No, I wouldn't. Again, you resort to your same old disgusting rhetoric when you can't win an argument.

If this is all about advancing Republicans, why would I call for redistricting reforms that would cost my party seats in Pennsylvania? You don't like to debate issues, px. You resort to talking points and blatant mischaracterizations.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Good for the Bush Administration and Rove. Last I checked, I wasn't Karl and didn't serve in that White House.

Do you support the dry foot policy with regards to Cuba? If so, why do you think they should receive different treatment from our government in comparison to illegal immigrants from say Venezuela?  

Political asylum is a different story and I wouldn't just grant it to Cubans.

Is that really your best attempt at showing my racial bias? Accepting only Cuban Hispanics?  

[Keystone Phil]

And, yes, it is a reward to be granted citizenship when your parents aren't citizens.

But the Founding Fathers put it in the Constitution!
How dare you question their wisdom!

Do you ever seriously engage people from the opposing side?

You lose an argument -> Sprinkle a little ridiculous rhetoric -> Change the subject -> Make more generalizations about me and my beliefs.

I'm beginning to think you just aren't a smart person. This is the best you can do and it's very sad.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

The real punishment would be to single out a group and deny them the rights granted to everyone in this country for centuries.

Enough with the constant victimization. The only people being singled out would be people that enter the country illegally. The real victims are the people you never talk about: the people that respect the law, wait their turn and are skipped over by fellow members of that "group."

And, yes, it is a reward to be granted citizenship when your parents aren't citizens.

You see, when you tell me to stop playing the so-called victim card and then you play it yourself it weakens your argument. Just saying. I'm not playing the victim card anyways, I'm simply explaining that if you take away a right from a certain person granted to others, it's clearly a punishment and that that right isn't a reward. In this country we're taught that birthright citizenship is keystone of our nation and that it's the most morally upright policy a nation can have. In otherwords at this point its viewed as a right, when in reality its a pretty lenient policy that could be characterized as a "reward" in the broad scale of world affairs but in the context of America its definitely a right.

My Mom is a member of that group. My family has experienced our legal immigration procedures first hand and they're absurd and full of bollocks and should be changed as soon as possible. bla bla bla, I'm using pathos to show how I have immigrant cred. I think everyone on this forum knows it. Oh and I'm the child of a former non-citizen too. More immigrant swag.

Anyways I fail to see how legal immigrants are "skipped" over because of illegal immigrants. Explain your point better talking about how it directly impacts immigration policy.

[Einzige Mk. II]

This is just another protectionist maneuver by states that feel the need to placate the nativist working classes. There's nothing remarkable here; The People are angry, and so The People are roaring. That I think The People ought to learn to shut up is quite beside the point.

[Landslide Lyndon]

And, yes, it is a reward to be granted citizenship when your parents aren't citizens.

But the Founding Fathers put it in the Constitution!
How dare you question their wisdom!

Do you ever seriously engage people from the opposing side?

You lose an argument -> Sprinkle a little ridiculous rhetoric -> Change the subject -> Make more generalizations about me and my beliefs.

I'm beginning to think you just aren't a smart person. This is the best you can do and it's very sad.

Why am I not serious? Constitution is holier than the Bible when it comes to condemning the "Big Government", according to the Republicans. They are even going to read it aloud at the House.

But when it comes to birthright citizenship...

No, I wouldn't. Again, you resort to your same old disgusting rhetoric when you can't win an argument.

If this is all about advancing Republicans, why would I call for redistricting reforms that would cost my party seats in Pennsylvania? You don't like to debate issues, px. You resort to talking points and blatant mischaracterizations.

Well, that's fine and noble. But we aren't talking about you.

[Keystone Phil]

The real punishment would be to single out a group and deny them the rights granted to everyone in this country for centuries.

Enough with the constant victimization. The only people being singled out would be people that enter the country illegally. The real victims are the people you never talk about: the people that respect the law, wait their turn and are skipped over by fellow members of that "group."

And, yes, it is a reward to be granted citizenship when your parents aren't citizens.

You see, when you tell me to stop playing the so-called victim card and then you play it yourself it weakens your argument. Just saying.

How am I doing that? I'm not crying about people being treated "unfairly" even though they take advantage of the system.


 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It isn't punishing that person; it isn't a "right," in my eyes, if you are born here as a result of an illegal entry.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Haha, uh, what school are you attending? "The most morally upright policy?" Ok, kid. Please stop editorializing.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

...

I know all of that. How is that supposed to convince me that your position is right? You don't get points for your position because you are connected to immigrants.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They're taking advantage of services that would have sooner been available to them. How about jobs, too?

[Einzige Mk. II]

They're taking advantage of services that would have sooner been available to them. How about jobs, too?

The idea that a native-born worker has a prima facie right to a job by virtue of his birth is ludicrous on his face. The working class the world over takes what it can gets and is happy with it or is fired; nowhere else does it whine about competition the way American workers do. Let that be our policy, too.

[Keystone Phil]

Why am I not serious? Constitution is holier than the Bible when it comes to condemning the "Big Government", according to the Republicans. They are even going to read it aloud at the House.

But when it comes to birthright citizenship...

Yes, when it comes to birthright citizenship, which the Founders didn't anticipate being so heinously abused...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Uh, you called me racist earlier. You told me my views are what they are because they help the GOP. So, yes, we are talking about my views. Do you really forget what you said about two posts ago?

[Keystone Phil]

They're taking advantage of services that would have sooner been available to them. How about jobs, too?

The idea that a native-born worker has a prima facie right to a job by virtue of his birth is ludicrous on his face.

I didn't argue that though. I said an immigrant that is waiting to lawfully enter the country is losing that opportunity to someone that just entered illegally.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

I never even said that you had racial bias, Phil. Lighten up. I'm just saying that why would you have a double standard with regards to Cuba because the process for becoming a legal permanent resident if you're Cuban is much different that if you were a refugee seeking asylum as a Venezuelan? There are double standards all over our immigration policy because we prioritize certain refugees from countries that we are at odds with namely: Iran, Vietnam, Cuba and Sudan while our country mostly ignores refugees from elsewhere.

I think it's definitely the morally upright thing to do when granting refugees resident status but the motives of Cuban refugees are much different than their old predecessors. They'll emigrate over here from economic purposes just as illegal immigrants do and that brings up the question why do we continue to treat them different? The obvious answer is to appease a constituency in a swing state. This is the wrong reason to treat migrants with respect and therefore our policy should be changed with regards to Cuba. There are many countries with as human rights violations as bad as Cuba that aren't given a swift process to gain residency.

[Einzige Mk. II]

I'm not sure if Phil has me blocked, so I'll simply expand on my point:

When a government undertakes to shelter its native industry from foreign competition, we call its policy 'protectionism'. And in the last century protectionism has been rightly recognized as the cause of much of the world's suffering, preventing as it does free and fair competition between businesses which lead to economic growth. By shielding business from competition, a government shields it from the very thing which forces it to innovate - and innovation, as we know, is the chiefmost guarantor of a high quality of life.

The logic of the market must become the logic of labour. These 'conservatives' are not conservative at all on this issue: where they would rightly decry any attempt by the government to unduly protect business interests from the ravages of competition, they seem determined to force that protection upon the working classes.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Why am I not serious? Constitution is holier than the Bible when it comes to condemning the "Big Government", according to the Republicans. They are even going to read it aloud at the House.

But when it comes to birthright citizenship...

Yes, when it comes to birthright citizenship, which the Founders didn't anticipate being so heinously abused...

So is the second amendment but try tell that to your fellows.

Uh, you called me racist earlier. You told me my views are what they are because they help the GOP. So, yes, we are talking about my views. Do you really forget what you said about two posts ago?

Partisan=Racist?

[Keystone Phil]

I never even said that you had racial bias, Phil. Lighten up. I'm just saying that why would you have a double standard with regards to Cuba because the process for becoming a legal permanent resident if you're Cuban is much different that if you were a refugee seeking asylum as a Venezuelan? There are double standards all over our immigration policy because we prioritize certain refugees from countries that we are at odds with namely: Iran, Vietnam, Cuba and Sudan while our country mostly ignores refugees from elsewhere.

...I'm pretty sure I argued that political asylum should be granted to the Venezuelan as well so, again, please don't lump me into a group that just wants the Cubans to have asylum for their votes.

I'm not sure if Phil has me blocked, so I'll simply expand on my point:

First of all, I don't block anyone. Secondly, I've really liked you since your return so I really wouldn't have any reason to block you. Thirdly, I responded to your post.  

[Einzige Mk. II]

They're taking advantage of services that would have sooner been available to them. How about jobs, too?

The idea that a native-born worker has a prima facie right to a job by virtue of his birth is ludicrous on his face.

I didn't argue that though. I said an immigrant that is waiting to lawfully enter the country is losing that opportunity to someone that just entered illegally.

That doesn't matter. The logic that you are using to condemn illegal immigration, if applied to the world of business and high finance, is the same as that used by the Obama Administration when it unduly forces itself upon overseas banks looking for tax 'cheats'. It's wrong-headed in both of its applications. Capitalism does not respect borders.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

Okay, Phil. If you really believe that the children of illegal immigrants aren't entitled to citizenship, then I can't convince you otherwise and I see no point to continue that argument. I just don't understand why conservatives are unwilling to give any path of residency (eventually citizenship) out to illegal immigrants that would involve them paying a hefty fine, going through hoops and even giving up services for a year or two. Wouldn't this be punishment enough for them breaking our immigration laws? It would be more practical than trying to support large masses of people or destroying America's reputation in Latin America and the other myriad consequences that would come out of gigantic crackdown against illegal immigrants. We'd end up losing millions of laborers whose jobs couldn't be replaced for long periods of time. We'd possibly radicalize remaining Hispanics too and push them into being an ultra-Democratic group that votes 80%+ for our candidates which I'm sure you wouldn't want.

Give illegal immigrants a path to citizenship and their descendants will soon enough become bland, GOP voting suburbanites just like you want.

[Keystone Phil]

So is the second amendment but try tell that to your fellows.

Oh, no! More of that gun hysteria from the hand wringing European. Do some more preaching about violence, px. By the way, is your country still burning down?

Again, px, you desperately shift gears. It's now so blatantly obvious that you're just not that intelligent and need to resort to this type of stuff to "make a point."

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So wait, am I partisan despite the example I cited above that you called "noble?" And, yes, apparently I am a racist. You said so yourself. You said it was racist for me to oppose birthright for Hispanics because they aren't Republican. If you're going to be an idiotic hack, at least keep your arguments straight.

[Keystone Phil]

I just don't understand why conservatives are unwilling to give any path of residency (eventually citizenship) out to illegal immigrants that would involve them paying a hefty fine, going through hoops and even giving up services for a year or two. Wouldn't this be punishment enough for them breaking our immigration laws?

Here's a path to citizenship: do exactly what many of their fellow countrymen are doing and wait. This only sounds "racist" to hand wringers because I'm not Hispanic but I'd say the same thing to my family when they were coming from Italy.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ah, don't enforce the law because other people won't like it. Good one.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You still think I'm holding my position for electoral political reasons? Wow.

[Einzige Mk. II]

Here's a path to citizenship: do exactly what many of their fellow countrymen are doing and wait. This only sounds "racist" to hand wringers because I'm not Hispanic but I'd say the same thing to my family when they were coming from Italy.

Here's a question for you: why? If an industry is willing to hire undocumented workers on the basis of economic considerations, why should reasons of "national integrity" matter more than ones of "economic integrity"? Business knows better than the government what it needs, and, apparently, what it needs is a workbase cheaper than that which American citizens are willing to give.