Posted on 12/30/2005 8:59:22 AM PST by joeclarke
Nothing could better prove the New World Order/Internationalist/World Federation conspiracies than the attempts by the left (and somewhat President Bush) to minimalize the value of being an United States Citizen.
Illegal immigrants have been given nearly full citizenship rights - without being Americanized or Naturalized.
Islamic enemy combatants have also been afforded Constitutional rights - even while actively terrorizing the United States.
What's with Dual and Tri citizenship?
Below is the highly ignored "Oath Of Citizenship" from the United States Citizenship And Immigration Service.
The Oath of Citizenship
"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God. In acknowledgement whereof I have hereunto affixed my signature.
In some cases, INS allows the oath to be taken without the clauses:
"...that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by law; that I will perform non-combatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by law. . . "
Notice that new immigrants are permitted to be future draft dodgers.
The same federal agency, which seems to act with no consistency or obedience to its own United States Code, requires that those given citizenship rights are of "good moral character." Now listen up all you Islamic enemy combatants and other illegals from south of the border, you must maintain your good moral character in order to be treated as a virtual U.S. citizen.
From Guide To Becoming A U.S. Citizen at http://uscis.gov/graphics/citizenship/becoming.htm:
"4. Good Moral Character:To be eligible for naturalization, you must be a person of good moral character. A person is not considered to be of "good moral character" if they commit certain crimes during the 5 years before they apply for naturalization or if they lie during their naturalization interview.If you commit some specific crimes, you can never become a U.S. citizen and will probably be removed from the country. These crimes are called "bars" to naturalization. Crimes called "aggravated felonies" (if committed on or after November 29, 1990), including: murder, rape, sexual abuse of a child, violent assault, treason, and trafficking in drugs, firearms, or people are some examples of permanent bars to naturalization. In most cases, immigrants who were exempted or discharged from serving in the U.S. Armed Forces because they were immigrants and immigrants who deserted from the U.S. Armed Forces are also permanently barred from U.S. citizenship."
[I also would think that if you are in this country illegally, you are not of Good Moral Character]
Illegal immigrants have been given nearly full citizenship rights - without being Americanized or Naturalized.
Islamic enemy combatants have also been afforded Constitutional rights - even while actively terrorizing the United States.
-----
This is the NEW WASHINGTON -- hypocrisy, anti-Americanism, double standards, and a system of laws that is a shambled mess.
re: "Illegal immigrants have been given nearly full citizenship rights"
Using sloppy phrases like that illustrates the sloppy emotion driving this issue that lacks facts and logic.
Citizenship is not a "right". It is a privilege. To claim it is a right is defeats your very argument that about immigration.
Both Conservatives, moderates and liberals are split on the immigration issue. But only the anti-immigrant conservatives seem willing to commit suicide over it, and take others down with them on the suicide path.
Recently the only thing that comes accross from the anti-immigrants is an strong emotion that is perceived as hateful, whether it is intended that way or not.
Then to use bad logic that argues against their own goal makes them lose all respect.
Get a grip. Immigration is a minor problem. Taxes, spending, over-regulation, murder of innocents, terrorism ... there are many bigger problems we face than the millions of hard working illegals buying up the houses in my suburb and thereby reducing the crime rate and DUI rate significantly.
"Get a grip. Immigration is a minor problem. Taxes, spending, over-regulation, murder of innocents, terrorism ... there are many bigger problems we face than the millions of hard working illegals buying up the houses in my suburb and thereby reducing the crime rate and DUI rate significantly."
What country are you living in? Illegal immigration and terrorism is more important than anything else, period!!
You and very few others believe that. Tell it to these folks:
http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=93408&ran=120909&tref=po
Harvest of death on the Eastern Shore
Since 2002, more than 90 people have been injured and 18 killed on the Eastern Shore in accidents involving Hispanic workers driving rogue vehicles. The fatalities represent about one-fourth of the 71 highway deaths on the Eastern Shore in that period, even though the year-round Hispanic population makes up only 5 percent of the region’s 51,000 residents. Those numbers swell during tomato-picking season, from July through early November, when most of the fatalities occurred.(snip)
____________
BRIDGEPORT — Chester Dillahunt of Fairfield survived World War II and the Korean War to be killed at the age of 86 by a drunken illegal immigrant. On Friday, Jeronimo Rocha, from Brazil, was sentenced to six years in prison for the crime. He'll be deported back to Brazil after he serves his term.(snip)
http://www.connpost.com/portlet/article/html/fragments/print_article.jsp? article=3340143 Published: Dec 25, 2005
"Both Conservatives, moderates and liberals are split on the immigration issue. But only the anti-immigrant conservatives seem willing to commit suicide over it, and take others down with them on the suicide path."
Actually, that is not true. if you take a look at the polls, it is pretty cler that the large majority of people in this nation want tougher immigration laws enforced. A majority even oppose a guestworker program. Take a look at those polls of conservatives. I think you will find that there is very little disagreement about what needs to be done.
Actually your information is bogus, as is much of the information on all sides of the issue... and yes there are more than 2 sides.
In Utah, the corrupt congressman was losing to the challenger while the challenger focused on corruption. Then the challenger switched message to anti-immigration and immediately went down in the public opinion polls, and beat himself in a race everyone thought he had a lock on it.
Here in Illinois, the main reason Oberweiss, the leading conservative candidate for governor, has peaked and cannot gain additional support... not from conservatives, not from moderates, not from anybody, is his anti-immigrant ads and image and inability to shift the debate away from immigration and onto taxes, spending and corruption.
If Oberweiss could make taxes, spending, corruption the agenda, then he would win in March and November.
But his liberal Republican opponent and liberal Dems salivate at the thought of keeping Oberweiss on the immigration issue where he can't even get half the conservatives to support him.
The same is true in other races accross the country. The anti-immigrant people are deluding themselves into believing their own spin.
"by a drunken illegal immigrant."
As an expert in vehicle crashes (1968 to present), the key word is "drunken" not "illegal immigrant". What do the following have in common?
-Vehicle crashes and deaths at any and every location in the USA
-Hunting, fishing, boating, sportsman's accidents and deaths
-Domestic violence and death
-Tragic deaths due to guns
-Tragic deaths due to kives, baseball bats, etc
-Being fired from a job and inability to get a good job
Yep, alcohol.
One of the major problems with illegal immigrants is alcohol. But that is also a major problem with non-immigrants.
The solution is simple: Quality, not quantity.
An immigrant should be judged by the content of his character, not by the color of his ID.
I'm not saying a candidate can win by only focusing in on illegal immigration, I'm simply saying that the large majority of conservatives and Americans in general are anti-illegal immigration. There are numerous polls that illustrate this point. Whatever side you are on, there is no disputing that.
What I am saying is that in reality, the single reason many conservatives are not embracing a conservative candidate, or are dumping him, is due to his anti-immigrant stance.
Note. That a position is popular or unpopular is a separate topic from whether it is morally right or wrong (if morality is involved) or whether it is good for the economy or some other yardstick.
It happens that I believe in FREE enterprise... let the marketplace decide both from a moral point of view, and from a pragmatic viewpoint that it is best for the economy. Those positions are separate from the popularity (or not) of that position, or any position on the issue. It just happens to be a coincidence that my position is in fact a winning position and the "fortress America" position is not a popular position.
That is not to say that there are not immigration problems that need fixing. Unfortunately, Neither Bush types nor Tancredo types address the real problems.
"What I am saying is that in reality, the single reason many conservatives are not embracing a conservative candidate, or are dumping him, is due to his anti-immigrant stance."
I don't think I agree with that. Alot of conservatives may not embrace Tancredo because many consider his rhetoric to be over the top, but if a candidate like George Allen, or even our President, were to take a hard line on the issue, he would gain a ton of support. If you are saying that alot of business loyal Republicans will not embrace a candidate because of an anti-illegal stance, then I agree with you. But the rest of the party, the majority of voters, are on the opposite side.
Look what happened in CA. An inexperienced candidate ran in a heavily Republican district and won 25% of the vote, keeping the Republican candidate under 50%. And Gilchrist took a beating from the media for over a year because of his controversial minuteman project. If you do not think that a better, more experienced, and well-fincanced candidate would cause significant trouble for Republicans in many states, I think otherwise.
BTW., I support a guestworker program if need be to deal with the economic issues. I am, however, opposed to any plan that equates to amnesty, ie. a guestworker plan with a path to citizenship. So, I am somewhat receptive to the Kyl/Cornyn plan, but 100% opposed to the "bipartisan" McCain/Kennedy plan.
First and foremost, however, I want increased security at the border to stop people from getting in, before any guestworker program is implemented.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.