Posted on 12/08/2004 2:14:54 PM PST by B4Ranch
Never forget...
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.
Yes, I have seen their scaling system. I like it.
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.
bttt
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?
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.
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.
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.
>>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?
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
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.
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.
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.
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.