YES, SIR, I AM AN AMERICAN AND DAMN PROUD OF IT TOO

My quiet office ^ | 12/08/2004 | Myself

[Libloather]

I will never forget September 11th, 2001.

Never forget...

[dcwusmc]

Wouldn't even take that. It says "...subject to the jurisdiction thereof," which foreigners and illegals are NOT. Else babies born here of diplomats, foreign leaders and dignitaries, etc, would be citizens and they are NOT. An illegal is NOT subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, except to the extent it takes to kick their sorry a$$es OUT of here.

[B4Ranch]

Yes, I have seen their scaling system. I like it.

[georgiabelle]

Maybe we should have the grades published in each state. Even if we have to take out an ad to get it out there. You will need someone (or two or three someones) in each state to make it happen.

Just a thought.

Count me in.

[Joe Hadenuf]

bttt

[unixfox]

[Bluegrass Conservative]

Might want to re-read your history books. Isolationism did not work. Global trade benefits our economy. And, had we not gotten involved in WWI when we did, it could have easily ended with the Germans winning. Considering that the Germans of those days were always jonesing for world domination (from the Kaiser to Hitler), who do you think would have been next on their target had we not joined up with Great Britain when we did?

[KittyKares]

Tom Tancredo is the Chairman of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus at http://www.house.gov/tancredo/Immigration/members.html. There you will find a link to a Congressional report card on immigration. Perhaps you can work something out with this group.

[TLI]

It was called isolationism."

I think it is not so much isolationism as it is, or should be Americanization.

The county can not prosper as it should by giving foreign nationals that broke every immigration law in the book all the rights and privileges of American Citizens. If we cave to PC communism and hand out those same rights and privileges to illegals it will create a sub-class of "americans" that will not value their rights and privilages, nor will they ever be considered real Americans.

Let them attain those rights and privileges the way all other immigrants did.

EARN THEM.

[B4Ranch]

We are the voters. We are the ones who decide who is going to represent us. We can let every elected official know what our concerns are and if they do not follow our wishes then we will not vote for their re-election.

I have no idea how many people emailed, faxed or called their Reps to what avail? The Reps decided that we were not important enough to listen to.

I want to start a system where they will listen to every word you say.

Simple, huh? Have your employee listen to you or you will fire him/her and put someone else in their chair. Not exactly an unknown policy in the business world.

[B4Ranch]

>>Look at most Americans prior to WWI. It was called isolationism.<<

Take a look at #70, add in Arlen Spectors name and tell where you see isolationism?

Add in obeying the law and tell where you see isolationism?

Add in having our State Department making treaties that benefit us and the other countries and tell where you see isolationism?

[1_Inch_Group]

To: B4Ranch You are a liberal's worst nightmare.

2 posted on 12/08/2004 2:16:48 PM PST by xJones [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

To: xJones

I'm just starting. I want socialists and communists to run like crazy at the mention of my name.

4 posted on 12/08/2004 2:18:19 PM PST by B4Ranch (((The lack of alcohol in my coffee forces me to see reality!))) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

What is good in life?

To crush your enemies...to drive them before you...and to hear the lamentations of their women

[american spirit]

I think your points are quite valid and along the lines of getting Congress to listen to the people isn't that oath of office essentially a contract with the people? I've heard it's basically a "naked contract" that requires "acceptance" from a living breathing soul. Perhaps the reason no one listens to us is that even though they've offered a contract to us no-one has accepted it as a firm and binding compact for the protection of one's rights.

[Still Thinking]

OK, so the kid is a citizen if he is born on US soil. So give the mom (who is still illegal) the option of taking her brand new US citizen home with her when she is deported, or leaving him here under an irrevocably anonymous adoption. Plenty of US families of whatever ethnicity would love to have the opportunity to adopt him. Just cause the baby's a citizen doesn't mean the mom is (especially since even his citizenship status is the fruit of illegal activity).

Oh, and if she chooses to take him back to her country, the child, having obtained citizenship through illegal means, would not be allowed to emigrate back into the US or enjoy any of the benefits of citizenship until his 30th birthday.

[hedgetrimmer]

Believe it or not it was Newt Gingrich who said on TV on the O'reilly Factor, that America was founded on a covenant and Europe's government was based on a contract.

The covenant is that we Americans get our rights and powers from the creator. We give some of our power to our elected officials for the purpose of government but we can always take it back from them because it belongs to us.

Europe's government is contractual. The people of Europe are just protoplasm (in Gingrich's words) and their government can give or take rights and freedoms at any time. (This idea must also be where the UN gets the idea that humans are merely biological resources to be moved around, educated only for the purposes of their labor, then used for labor)

We have to preserve the idea that our nation and our government is a covenant of the people and that we can take power away from the government when necessary because our power belongs to us.

I was very surprised at Mr. Gingrich's discussion and happy that someone on national television is acknowledging the roots of our government.

He also said to get rid of the activist judges, it is perfectly Constitutional for the people to abolish the court. For example, the judges of the 9th circuit have been overturned more times than any other judges in history. The people of the United States have every right to abolish that court. He said it was done in 1802, I think, to prevent the federalization of the newly formed government and to preserve individual and states rights.

Its worth looking into, definitely.

[LexBaird]

So give the mom (who is still illegal) the option of taking her brand new US citizen home with her when she is deported, or leaving him here under an irrevocably anonymous adoption

I've thought of that option before, and came to the conclusion that I am unwilling to cede the Government that sort of control over the parent/child relationship. If we decide the govt. has the ability to take children from their parents for this reason, we open the door to the ACLU and others, such as Shalala and Hillary's CDF, using it as a legal precedent to take kids from parents in other situations, such as if there is a gun in the house.

No, I believe the only way to stop the anchor baby loophole is to either change the Constitution, or to eliminate the free hospital maternity services for illegals. Option two is what the courts found "unconstitutional" about Prop 187 and Grey Davis refused to appeal.