"Anchor Babies" and the 14th Amendment

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by whell

Count me as a hypocrite, I guess.

I know many folks frame the open borders argument in these terms. However, using the "we're all immigrants, so open the borders" argument, and the emotionalism attached to it, doesn't really withstand scrutiny.

None of my grandparents were born in the USA. They came to the US from Canada or Great Britain. However, there was a process then, as there is now, to apply for and be granted resident status or citizenship status.

A country has every right to control its borders. It is the first order of business for a government to protect and control its borders, and manage the influx of visitors, and potential short term or long term residents. Countries do this to protect the current population / citizenry, and well as manage the social and economic impact of immigration. The US currently does an inadequate job of managing immigration and managing ingress. This is central to the complaint of many current US citizens.

That said, I don't disagree that the fixing the lack of current border control should focus on the Anchor Baby issue. Frankly, I think it is a distraction to the real issue of border control.

Welcome, Whell, but what has this to do with the 14th Amendment?

John

[finnbow]

You do realize the slur "WOP", usually used against Italians, meant "WithOut Papers". That's right. Folks from Italy who snuck past immigration, and entered the country illegally. Some of them came here running from the law and set up powerful crime syndicates once they got here. Mafia families that we still fight to this very day.

Although this provides interest historical context, it doesn't provide a particularly compelling argument in favor of relaxed immigration rules, paisan.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Although this provides interest historical context, it doesn't provide a particularly compelling argument in favor of relaxed immigration rules, paisan.

Yes, but I don't recall hearing anyone on this board - or anywhere, really - arguing for relaxing immigration laws, capiche?

John

[merrylander]

Which brings me to the point, what is it about the immigration laws that is supposed to be broken?

[Boreas]

Who says they're not great and true Americans?





John

[merrylander]

No idea who the lady is but Jindal has turned out not to be the sharpest knife in the drawer.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by merrylander

No idea who the lady is....

That's the lovely and talented Michelle Malkin.

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Michelle Malkin.

she's kinda attractive in a vulgar way, no?

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by whell

Count me as a hypocrite, I guess.

Done.

"We're" all immigrants?

Uh, no. Me, and ~1.5% of the U.S. population, have some roots.

The other model, not being uber-specific but it appears you are one of them, who now oppose the 14th Amendment?

They are immigrant-spawn who, now, have the elitist audacity to question the actions of others as part of the great, washed, protectorate.

It's incredibly hypocritical.

I guess my ancestors should have just tried harder to close the borders...

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Who says they're not great and true Americans?





John

Geez John. Whoever caught that still of Michelle Malkin did a tremendous job of showing her personality. It's a shame that something so caustic comes wrapped in such a nice package.

Regards,

D-Ray