Recession Deepens as Immigrants Flood in US

Discussion in 'Off-Topic Discussions' started by zanger, Aug 6, 2010.

  1. zanger

    zanger member

    As the nation sinks into deeper economic abyss immigrants are permitted to flood the country, while people are given 99 weeks unemployment because the people that opened the floodgates say there are no jobs. Social Security is in now in to red as national debt reaches Greek levels. America, formerly #1 in per capita income is down to about 15th and dropping.

    Congratulation modern Americans in acting irresponsibly and destroying the experiment in freedom and self government.
  2. Fortunato

    Fortunato Member

    Only the Wall Street Journal could spin the July jobs report with the headline "US Employers Shed Jobs". The fact of the matter is that employment grew in most private sectors of the economy, but those gains were vastly offset by the layoffs of nearly 140K temporary workers hired by the government for the 2010 census, and by the layoffs of nearly 50K employees by state and local governments. Everyone knew the July jobs report was going to be bad because these government employees were going to be losing their jobs, but that was going to happen regardless of the state of the economy (since, after all, the census only happens once every ten years), and I don't see what it has to do with illegal immigration.

    I thought conservatives were supposed to celebrate when the government got smaller, but I guess it's more important to swipe at illegals than to acknowledge what really happened in the economy last month. Why not try to pin the bad economy on gay marriage?
  3. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Well, there really is the "we're being punished for our iniquities!" school of thought.

  4. b4cz28

    b4cz28 New Member

    How come anyone makes any comment about illegal immigration, Obama, anything at all about the Democrats, they are treated like hate mongers? Let me tell you something, the democrats are the most racist group of people on the plant. I loved the clip on Fox News the other night about this. They put together this incredibly long clip of democrats deflecting comments by republicans. Just like you did here,

    "I thought conservatives were supposed to celebrate when the government got smaller, but I guess it's more important to swipe at illegals than to acknowledge what really happened in the economy last month. Why not try to pin the bad economy on gay marriage? "

    He made no comment about Democrats or gay marriage yet you bring it into the mix. This is how democrats do it.

    Here is your post from the other day,

    “It sounds like you have fallen for some right-wing media "dog whistles" designed to provoke ire in those who are ill-informed. There is no reason to tamper with birthright citizenship, and if you understood the history of it and the 13th and 14th amendments, you would know that those who propose its abolishment share an ideological common cause with those who would have denied citizenships to freed slaves after the civil war.”

    You compare the op with people who want to deny citizenship to slaves. He made no comment of the sort and yet you start talking about conservative…..yada.. yada.. yada
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 6, 2010
  5. Fortunato

    Fortunato Member

    If you are going to discuss politics, then you need to have thicker skin. Disagreement is not the same as maltreatment. This community is made up of people brought together by our shared interest in distance education, not by our shared politics. If you want to talk politics here, you should not be surprised when you run into people who think your ideas are wrong and tell you so. You seem to think that if people disagree with your opinions, then they are calling you names.

    See, this is name calling. Specifically, this is you calling me a racist. Way to stay classy.

    Jon Stewart called, and he wants his bit back.

    What I did there was called sarcasm. Since you aren't familiar with how it works, I'll try to explain it to you. After arguing that the drop in the jobs report was largely due to a decrease in government payrolls and not due to illegal immigration as was posited by the OP, I made reference to another issue that also provokes rage in right wingers, but was equally irrelevant to the jobs report as a way of mocking the deficiencies I found in his argument. Sarcasm is a rhetorical device that some find illuminating and humorous, but admittedly, the humor is lost on others.

    You are absolutely right that I compared the original poster in that thread with someone who wanted to deny citizenship to freed slaves.


    The argument that NorCal was using against birthright citizenship basically boils down to this:

    "Some people who are not US citizens have children who are US citizens. I don't like the idea of tax dollars paying for the benefits those children receive as citizens. Therefore we should abolish birthright citizenship."

    And the argument you would have heard in the late 1860s went something like this:

    "Ex-slaves have no rights to citizenship because they were imported to this country, they did not come voluntarily. In fact, the Supreme Court (in Scott vs. Sanford) said that Negroes could never be citizens. The idea that Negroes could be citizens makes me uncomfortable, so we should not pass the 14th amendment."

    Basically, both of these arguments are "I don't like the consequences that come with granting citizenship to a certain group of people, therefore we should not grant them citizenship." If you don't see the similarity between these two arguments, then you are either not being intellectually honest, or being deliberately obtuse, or both. You are also completely ignoring Supreme Court precedent going back to the 1870s that overruled congressional attempts to place limits on the citizenship rights of children of immigrants, legal or otherwise.

    I don't think NorCal is racist, but his line of thinking has been used to justify or call for racist actions. I don't think that zanger is racist, only that he has problems with cause and effect, as does the Wall Street Journal. I can't apologize for disagreeing with them, however, because that apology would be insincere.
  6. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Hmm. No one here is suggesting that those descended from slaves have their citizenship stripped from them. In fairness, I think it's possible to argue for repealing the fourteenth amendment and denying jus soli in future cases without being a racist.

  7. Fortunato

    Fortunato Member

    The problem with repealing the fourteenth amendment (specifically, Section 1 - I doubt anyone seriously wants to repeal Section 4 and open up the question of whether or not the southern states are responsible for the debts of the CSA) is that once you've done so, unless you immediately pass another constitutional amendment that so clearly delineates what makes someone a citizen, you have put us into a situation where citizenship can be granted and rescinded at the whim of the legislature. If you don't think that's a problem, then look at the late nineteenth century brouhahas around citizenship of Native Americans (Elk v. Wilkins) and children of Chinese immigrants (United States v. Wong Kim Ark). Those cases came up after the passage of the 14th amendment and basically set the standards as we know them today.

    I have tried to be abundantly clear that I do not think anyone on this forum is a racist. That being said, you simply cannot discuss removing the principle of jus soli from the Constitution without acknowledging that there were racial implications surrounding its implementation, and that its removal would necessarily raise some of the same racial implications. We are a melting pot society, but at almost every point in our history there has been some racial or ethnic minority that has had trouble integrating into our collective community. Because the children of immigrants are always unambiguously American, our melting pot continues to thrive despite these temporary tensions. A generation or two from now, and being Hispanic will make one no more "different" than being of Irish or German descent. Eliminating jus soli would change that in a way I believe is incongruent with what America is supposed to stand for.
  8. StefanM

    StefanM New Member

    You have got it all wrong. We have had massive layoffs of transsexual and gay illegal immigrants from Guatemala.

    They were employed destroying the institution of marriage, but the overturning of Prop 8 made them redundant so they were laid off from their usual jobs.

    (end sarcasm)
  9. cjzande

    cjzande New Member

    Fortunato, snide, superior dismissiveness may not be name calling, but it is equally rude.

    Now, maybe that quote takes it too far. I do believe there can be a gentle form of teasing/sarcasm done in fun, when it is either aimed at oneself, someone who is already laughing at his own folly, or a general situation/event. But when it is employed directly as an attack on someone, it is a horrible way to behave.

    Honey, I am definitely a conservative, and I assure you I have very thick skin. There's not a thing you could say to me that would bother me in any way, personally, but it would be nice to think that while you are so busy lecturing us, you could find a way to do it that was less inclined to make me ignore your posts, rather than perhaps learn something from you.

    *pokes Stefan* - that was probably unnecessary, too, hmm?
  10. StefanM

    StefanM New Member

    Is any discussion board post necessary?

    I try not to be too serious online.
  11. cjzande

    cjzande New Member

    Point to you. I worded that badly. I should not have said "necessary." I meant it in a "At this point, we're all just fanning the flames on a thread that's already gone wild, and we should probably stop." way. And, yes, I certainly include myself in that!
  12. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Or the courts, yikes. I wasn't suggesting it at all, and wouldn't, I was just saying that one can suggest it without necessarily being racist.

  13. HikaruBr

    HikaruBr Member

    My friend, if you're against immigration you're definitely not a friend of freedom.

    You should check the meaning of the word in a dictionary.
  14. rickyjo

    rickyjo New Member

    Fewer unauthorized immigrants in U.S. in 2009, government says -

    Illegal Immigration Declined In 2009, Says Department Of Homeland Security | Latin America News Dispatch

    "Of all unauthorized immigrants living in the United States in 2009, 63 percent entered before 2000, according to the report"

    "There were 11.6 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States in January 2008 and 10.8 million one year later, DHS said. "

    Not only is immigration on the decline, but current illegal residents are leaving faster than they are arriving resulting in a net loss of illegals in this country. Immigration follows the jobs my friends, and when the jobs are gone, they leave. Part of the reason for our recession is the slowing population growth, that will stop economic growth in any country. Historically our economy grows when immigration is occurring (although I acknowledge the strong incentive for immigration during good times also plays into it, a shared, self-perpetuating effect).

    I also agree that immigration should be encouraged in free countries.
  15. zanger

    zanger member

    Permitting immigration during the time of high unemployment is being irresponsible. People are being paid 99 weeks of unemployment, as temporary work visas are being granted. Singapore, that physically beats illegals, has a higher per capita income than the United States. Remember way back when the United States was #1?

    America had proper immigration laws when John F. Kennedy was president, you mean America was not free when Kennedy was president?

    The truth is the people that want open borders are the same people that were waiving North Vietnamese flags during the Vietnam War. When someone calls for open borders, they are openly admitting they are traitors that are being destructive.

    See this video about immigration:
  16. zanger

    zanger member

    There is no need to repeal the 14th Amendment, the 14th Amendment already says the so-called anchor babies can be kicked out. Notice the 14th Amendment says born AND subject to the United States. An illegal alien born out in the desert on the border is not subject to the United States because they are are in open defiance of the law, in other words they are outlaws. An outlaw is someone that is outside the law, in other words they did not subject themselves to the law. The traitors willfully ignore the "subject" part. The constitution plainly says being born in the US is not enough.

    The courts just make things up. Sodomy was illegal in every state when the constitution was written, but the court says the constitution says state sodomy laws violate the constitution?

    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 8, 2010
  17. zanger

    zanger member

    The people that say anchor babies have an automatic right to citizenship are lying. Below is a quote from Senator Jacob Howard who wrote the 14th Amendment that says children of noncitizens born here are not citizens, since he wrote the 14th Amendment I think he it qualifies him as an expert.

    Below is a Supreme Court case from 1873 saying children of foreigners born here are not automatically citizens.
  18. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Zanger, I disagree with little of what you say. What I do take issue with is your tone. I suggest that the best way to approach discussions on this board is in a friendly manner, there's really little need to take an advesarial tone. If you were on talk radio trying to boost ratings then such a tone might be helpful to the improving the ratings. You may find that people you disagree with on some issues here are still very intelligent and nice people. If you take a friendly tone it will be much easier for people to be friendly toward you. It will also improve and raise the level of thoughtful exchange.

    Welcome aboard, I hope you like the place and stick around.
  19. rickyjo

    rickyjo New Member

    I love my country and the immigrants that have made us great in the past and will make us even greater in the future. Also, thanks Bill, good post.
  20. b4cz28

    b4cz28 New Member

    How many English immigrants do you see waving GB flags? Not many, they assimilate into US culture. The more I think about this the more its less about immigration then it is about assimilation. Immigrants from Mexico are not assimilating into our society; they are trying to change our society to meet there needs. I have posted before about the guy down the road from me, who is from South Korea, that dude is a better American than I will ever be, hands down. He knows about more political issues, speaks better English and wakes up every morning before work and puts out an American flag, he takes it down at night, and he knows when it should be flow at half mast. He is part of the US culture, he respects it, he is no longer a guest, he is an American. I drive around and I see Mexico flags from mirrors, bumper sticker back windows etc. There is a new trend I have been seeing where they put the city and state in Mexico across the back window of their car. I'm not saying to forget about where you came from, just respect where you are. There are no excuses for second and third generation kids from Mexico living in the US not to speak English, and then bitch because they are falling behind in school.

    So in the end your off RJ, they will no longer make us better they will use us a like a whore and go back home when she is used up. No longer do you see people making the investment the huddled masses once did. They send money back home. The rent and keep the house back home. They leave at the drop of the hat, they will never be Americans.

Share This Page