Left-Wing, Right-wing, or Central?

[HeyYou]

All politicians lie. Some more so than others, but, I don't trust anything that comes out of a politicians mouth. Even if they told me the sky is blue, I would go out and look for myself. (and it would probably be grey.)

 

Trump wants to drop the 'born here, get citizenship' part of the 14th amendment. Or at least, alter it so it does NOT apply to the children of ILLEGAL immigrants. I don't have a problem with that.

[MotoSxorpio]

I said that. Expand.

[MotoSxorpio]

Thrones?

 

Accolades?

 

Likes?

 

Votes?

 

Endorsements?

 

Freedom?

[colourwheel]

 

All politicians lie. Some more so than others, but, I don't trust anything that comes out of a politicians mouth. Even if they told me the sky is blue, I would go out and look for myself. (and it would probably be grey.)

 

I agree with you on this, a large majority of people realize that "most" politicians do lie. Which is ironic why someone like Clinton for some reason is getting a lot of heat for the current email scandal she is facing. It really comes down to how the media rails a story. The Clinton email scandal wouldn't even be any concern to anyone if it wasn't even talked about. The New York times first started railing Clinton in three stores by accidentally reporting falsely and printing info about the story that even they eventually redacted. Since then the right wing media jumped in and took the story to a whole different level.

 

 

Trump wants to drop the 'born here, get citizenship' part of the 14th amendment. Or at least, alter it so it does NOT apply to the children of ILLEGAL immigrants. I don't have a problem with that.

 

Getting rid of even "part" of the 14th amendment would fundamentally just destroy one of the things that makes America actually such a great country. I mean how far would one go to just getting rid of part of it, as only applying to "illegal" immigrants? Would this apply to immigrants that are here legally that happen to have a child in the U.S.? would this mean if a couple has a baby born in this country and just one of them isn't an actual a citizen but still here legally their child would be automatically labeled as an "illegal"? If you are talking about a person giving birth to a child in this country who is completely undocumented, there is no statistical data showing this even being an actual problem in this country other then making America a richer and more diverse society.

 

Citizen children cannot sponsor their parents for citizenship until they turn 21. If the parents are illegal, they would have to return home for at least 10 years before even applying to come in. Having a baby to secure citizenship for the parent is an extremely long-term and uncertain process anyways... Citizen child can produce some short-term benefits but not enough that creates any sort of statistical problem. Having a child can help an undocumented parent qualify for relief from deportation, but only 4,000 unauthorized immigrants can receive such status per year, and the person has to have been in the U.S. for at least 10 years to begin with. Stuff like this is so small in comparison to any other problem this nation faces. It's just ridiculous why anyone would want to get rid of birthright citizenship when there isn't even a real problem that America faces.

 

But more to the point Trump doesn't just want to stop there. Trump wants to force deport every undocumented immigrant in this country. How exactly do you think one can accomplish this? Crate a separate police that targets anyone who isn't white/caucasian? does this mean me being an Asian American citizen could be randomly pulled over in order to prove I am actually a citizen? Maybe you can see why I do not like Trumps position on immigration. I am sure you wouldn't support someone who would set forth some policy that would potentially or even automatically target you as some type of 2nd class citizen just based on your race.

Edited August 28, 2015 by colourwheel

[HeyYou]

 

 

All politicians lie. Some more so than others, but, I don't trust anything that comes out of a politicians mouth. Even if they told me the sky is blue, I would go out and look for myself. (and it would probably be grey.)

 

I agree with you on this, a large majority of people realize that "most" politicians do lie. Which is ironic why someone like Clinton for some reason is getting a lot of heat for the current email scandal she is facing. It really comes down to how the media rails a story. The Clinton email scandal wouldn't even be any concern to anyone if it wasn't even talked about. The New York times first started railing Clinton in three stores by accidentally reporting falsely and printing info about the story that even they eventually redacted. Since then the right wing media jumped in and took the story to a whole different level.

 

 

Trump wants to drop the 'born here, get citizenship' part of the 14th amendment. Or at least, alter it so it does NOT apply to the children of ILLEGAL immigrants. I don't have a problem with that.

 

Getting rid of even "part" of the 14th amendment would fundamentally just destroy one of the things that makes America actually such a great country. I mean how far would one go to just getting rid of part of it, as only applying to "illegal" immigrants? Would this apply to immigrants that are here legally that happen to have a child in the U.S.? would this mean if a couple has a baby born in this country and just one of them isn't an actual a citizen but still here legally their child would be automatically labeled as an "illegal"? If you are talking about a person giving birth to a child in this country who is completely undocumented, there is no statistical data showing this even being an actual problem in this country other then making America a richer and more diverse society.

 

Citizen children cannot sponsor their parents for citizenship until they turn 21. If the parents are illegal, they would have to return home for at least 10 years before even applying to come in. Having a baby to secure citizenship for the parent is an extremely long-term and uncertain process anyways... Citizen child can produce some short-term benefits but not enough that creates any sort of statistical problem. Having a child can help an undocumented parent qualify for relief from deportation, but only 4,000 unauthorized immigrants can receive such status per year, and the person has to have been in the U.S. for at least 10 years to begin with. Stuff like this is so small in comparison to any other problem this nation faces. It's just ridiculous why anyone would want to get rid of birthright citizenship when there isn't even a real problem that America faces.

 

But more to the point Trump doesn't just want to stop there. Trump wants to force deport every undocumented immigrant in this country. How exactly do you think one can accomplish this? Crate a separate police that targets anyone who isn't white/caucasian? does this mean me being an Asian American citizen could be randomly pulled over in order to prove I am actually a citizen? Maybe you can see why I do not like Trumps position on immigration. I am sure you wouldn't support someone who would set forth some policy that would potentially or even automatically target you as some type of 2nd class citizen just based on your race.

 

What part of "children of illegal immigrants don't get citizenship' did you miss? The operative word there being "ILLEGAL". Currently, that system is exploited in a major way by illegals that come here, squeeze out a baby, that is automagically an american citizen, thus, cannot be deported. Hence "Anchor Baby". This practice needs to stop. We are the ONLY country in the world that grants citizenship to children of illegals. If an immigrant is here legally, it should be obvious that this wouldn't apply to them.

 

Deporting all the illegals is more than likely impossible. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that they come in faster than we could deport them. Even if we made a concerted effort. But, as it stands today...... we are like folks at a fishing contest. It's 'catch and release'. Regardless of their history. Some of them have been here for years, been caught several times, and still they are released. What strikes me as even stupider is, a cop is forbidden by law from questioning anyones citizenship when they are pulled over....... I am thinkin' if the person doesn't understand english, doesn't have a drivers license, nor any other form of identification, that should be a pretty major clue, and SHOULD bring up the question. If the answer is "illegally here", then deportation should be the answer.

 

Sure, this country was built on immigration. But, now we have a population of over 300 million, and in some areas of the country, (like those where most of the illegals come in....) are desparately running short of resources. Especially water, and money. So, why are we spending billions on benefits for folks whose very first act of coming to this nation was to break its laws? We would anyone think that is a good idea? We are trillions of dollars in debt, and going even further down, we don't have the money to spend to 'save the world', or even a small corner of it. We can't even afford to save ourselves. And please don't try and convince me that the illegals pay taxes/contribute to the economy. That is a losing proposition. We spend FAR more on illegals, than they put in to our economy. It is a hugh net loss. Of course, I don't think we should be sending 10 billion a year to Iraq either, or 4 billion to Israel. Etc.......

[Harbringe]

Just so you all know , the right of citizenship by birth was instituted as an inalienable right as given by your creator . Thats the Constitutional basis by which it was drawn up. There is a reason why the founding fathers wanted it that way and it was to limit the power of the state . In their (founding fathers) time (and millenia before that) it was a greatly abused power for a ruler to simply say to a person or group of people your not part of this country. And the founding fathers wanted to take that power away from the state , citizenship by birth is how that was done. I find it odd that those who profess small government would be willing to remove one of the conditions that is a check of its power . Giving this power back to the state is the ultimate power for a state and certainly will not lead to small government . Its a bad idea . By the way the US is not the only country that practices it . Canada also has the same law . There are a few other counries that practice it and some that have a hybrid of it , but overall we are in the minority when it comes to this type of law.

[Lisnpuppy]

That being said, it some ways it does not matter. Granting the children citizenship may make it far more easy to keep track of them and the illegal parents. Also many states still offer social services and the children are permitted to go to school and apply for free or reduced lunch etc. Not to mention the cost of rounding them up, holding them until the hearing and deportation is a huge, costly thing. And do we know it would be cheaper in the long run to do this over, over, over.

 

Citizenship for birth no doubt comes from a time when all immigration was welcome and as the US lacks in history the idea of a birthright tot hose born on US soil (and it used to be that an embassy was US soil and if you were born there you got it.)

 

Perhaps the children could be given a minor citizenship and would have to do all the normal things required of someone applying for citizenship when they turn 18. If the parents have applied after the child is born and are also in good standing from that point then they can apply at that time also. If they have not been, have dropped off the radar, etc etc then at that time they can be deported.

 

It really is a problem but as you say deportation isn't maybe the answer in the mass deportation kind of way.

 

Contrary to Trump and many others, many, many, many illegals are hard-working and law-abiding people. They DO perform in jobs that most of us would not work, a few of us even in the worst of circumstances. My Dad used to live near an apple orchard that had migrant workers (and you have to know many are prob illegals) and it is hard, miserable work that has little regulation including the pay wage. Other illegals know they can't get normal jobs so work off the grid and are paid and treated horribly. I don't think because you are here illegally means you should be treated like that. That is OUR shame.

 

Most of our illegals come from Mexico and Latin America, then many of the African countries that have been in chaos for years. I wouldn't go to Mexico right now as an American for love nor money. I know many would disagree (and I don't think this is the debate for this) but legalizing many drugs will take the money out of the system, which will take much of the violence out of the system. The drug cartels run Mexico. Many that stand against them are punished. The unemployment and poverty level in Latin American is awful. You can't tell me that if sneaking into the US offered you and your family/children some hope that you might not try it.

 

I don't look at these folks like they are taking our jobs in some competitive sense. I look at many of them (though of course there is always bad apples so to speak) as people desperate and at the end of their rope. Legalize them, track them, get them to pay taxes on the work they do anyway.

 

And unfortunately I believe technology is going to move in this much like a Big Brother scenereo. I really thing someday we will all have chips planted somewhere with personal info, medical info and all the info regarding where we were born, etc.

 

I am unsure what else can be done on this issue at present.

[WursWaldo]

You people do not understand what the 14th Amendment states, how it was intended or that wasn't anything taken into consideration by the Founding Fathers; that's why it's an Amendment. Basically, the 14th mandates birth right citizenship. In 1868 that meant former slaves. In 1924 it was extended to Native Americans mainly due to their service during WW1. It was never intended to apply the children of illegal immigrants. We all know this.

Congress (and only Congress) has the constitutional power to determine who is or is not within the jurisdiction of the United States. The instance of Native Americans proves this. The 14th does not provide for the children of foreigners in this country legally or illegally. If a British woman comes to the U.S. legally on vacation and has her baby here that child IS NOT a U.S citizen, since the U.S. has no jurisdiction over the mother. The baby is a citizen of the U.K., simple as that. The same applies to people who enter the country illegally, their children are not U.S. citizens since they are the sons and daughters of foreign nationals. They might be living here, but they do not have the legal right to be here.

 

And since we are talking about the Constitution, I guess the 4th Amendment is something Democrats don't want or need. The fascist police state 'Trump wants to create' is already here; and liberal social justice Obama made it happen. Sixty to ninety miles inside the U.S. border with Mexico there are check points where Immigration agents demand that people identify themselves. They have no probable cause to stop people at the check points since simply driving on a highway doesn't constitute reasonable belief of any wrong doing. "Are you a citizen of the United States?" is what they ask. Donald Trump didn't make this happen, Obama did. He is the one stomping on the law and the Constitution, not Trump. Liberals want to rant about something that Trump might do, when Obama has already done it. The fascist 'papers please' police state is happening right now, but they are mad that Trump. This demonstrates how partisan clueless some liberals are; they hate Trump for saying it and love Obama for doing it. That makes perfect liberal sense. :wacko:

 

EDIT:

I'm a U.S. citizen. Though I wasn't born here, my family came here legally. :smile:

Edited August 28, 2015 by WursWaldo

[sunshinenbrick]

The law like everything else, changes. These laws can change to suit certain situations. Most of our civil laws are imposed by human systems and will be dictated by those who can enforce them and by the pressures of nature.

On the grand scale of things and in the new digital age all of these laws are becoming soluble and increasingly factored by economics (including natural resources).

The same thing is happening everywhere and it is perhaps foolish to think that just because anyone is born somewhere it does not necessarily mean they are entitled to live there and enjoy the 'good life'. Especially if they are unable to pay taxes and get employment in the markets that exist.

This is globalisation. Of course none of this is made a big deal of because 'slaves' are much easier to control if they believe they are making the choices.

 

Now, not everyone will have to move obviously, as the future neo-feudal world drawn by virtual realities means large numbers of people will be operating between two worlds... some may never leave the virtual.

 

Check out this concept map: The Internet World

[WursWaldo]

Just an FYI, Lincoln's was a member of the National Party, the precursor to the Republican Party. He freed the slaves, in case anyone here missed that. Andrew Johnson ratified the 14th Amendment and was impeached by DEMOCRATS for being a "Radical Republican". Calvin Coolidge was President in 1924 when Native Americans were included in the 14th Amendment. He was a Republican too. Ronald Regan's Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 granted amnesty to thousands of illegal immigrants. The track record for REPUBLICANS taking on citizen birth outweighs what Democrats have done. The only thing liberals have is Obama's law-breaking Executive Order pen. In what retarded social justice world is open borders and general amnesty a good idea?

 

If anything the liberal posts in this thread are good for a laugh, God knows they aren't worth anything more.