ummmmmmm none of it should be repealed.
Rand Paul wins Senate Primary, soon to be a pro-legalization senator!
- Thread starter Bill O'Reilly
- Start date
- Status
I urge you to read the link I posted two posts prior to this one.
Pantalicious
Member
+ Rep for the Terrence McKenna reference 
Maria_Vanessa
Member
First, I would like to say, thank you for the link. It was informative. After I finished reading the article, I looked to see who wrote this page. The gentleman who wrote it is named Fred Elbel. After some investigating, I found out that Fred Elbel is co-chair of an organization called Colorado Alliance for Immigration Reform in Lakewood, Colorado. http://www.cairco.org/matricula/hb1224_senate_testimony_fe.html
In one particular instance on the link you posted, Mr. Elbel tries to use the 1889 case of The United States vs Wong Kim Ark, as evidence that the 14th amendment was never meant to give U.S. citizenship to children born in the United States from illegal immigrants.
Unfortunetly, Mr. Elbel does not include that the Chinese Exclusion Act that the United States was passed to specifically prevent Chinese people from becoming naturalized American citizens. This is an important fact that Mr. Elbel neglects and it is specific to this case.
Ark was already a naturalized citizen. Ark travel abroad at least two times to visit his parents in China and was able to enter as a rightful American citizen. It was during the last visit to his parents, that the American government would not let him in America and denied him his citizenship because of the Chinese Exclusion Act. Ark challenged the government's Act, and that is how the ruiling of children born in this country can become American citizens, even if they are from illegal immigrant parents came to be.
I believe Rutherford Hayes, a Republican, was the one who signed it into law. Blame him.
In closing, yes I do believe this country does need immigration reform. As a tax-payer, I do not want to pay for illegal immigrants or their care. But I don't agree with the methods of people like Mr. Engel, because they speak and spread half-truths. Yes, Mr. Engel was right on some points, but he neglected the details of each case, such as the one with Wong Kim Ark.
I do believe this country does need immigration reform. But it is always the immigrants who are attacked and villified, and never the businesses and private citizens who transport and hire them. One day, go to a popular restaurant that serve Chinese food. If you get a chance, try to peek in the kitchen. Chances are, there won't be anyone of Asian-descent cooking the food.
In addition, what I don't like is, the automatic assumption of who is an illegal immigrant. No one can tell who is an illegal immigrant by looking. Also, there are alot of people brought into this country, illegally, against their will to work as maids or servants or as prostitutes, both female and male and often children.
For the third time, bcause I might get attacked ^_^, I do believe in immigration reform. But they way it is going about now on the state and federal level is just a waste of tax payer money and time.
Nobody yawn's with such excruciating detail, (with most of it after the fact.) You were on the fucking edge of yer stump the whole time.
I remember you now. You're the guy that does the irritating manual format, calls others out for mirrored condescension and posts comments in your sig line. All over, "All my problems (and more I haven't thought of) are due to evil progressives and I'll get my next fix at 5 o'clock. Then I'll find any moderate or left of center peep and tell them what they think, with a nice dose of condescension."
I think yer Glen Beck progressive conspiracy is just about as far as you can climb out on the limb and not fall off. The more you reveal, the closer you get to no limb and the twig breaks.
That's why you piece meal your feeds and they come back to paint a picture before the hour is up. Figuratively speaking of course as yours take days.
I'll just stick to Rand Paul, thank you. You can psycho-politicize somebody else.
I guess the headline was brief. I assumed you'd gather the birth citizenship part since were in the racially insensitive candidate thread.
But maybe you're right. I should point out the obvious more often.
Interesting point. The author of Freakanomics argues that it was the passage of Roe vs Wade that led to the sudden drop in the crime rate in the 1990's when some people were predicting blood was about to run in the streets because of the crime wave. And then it suddenly dropped off. The aborted children from 1973 on would have just been hitting their 20's. Peak criminal age.
The argument centers around that women who are forced to have children they do not want end up raising them in severely dysfunctional homes and they later are much more likely to turn to crime. They are raised as a burden in a home that they were unwanted in the first place. It is quite a compelling argument and he supports it with compelling evidence.
I'm personally ok with abortion. It's the woman's choice IMO, but at the same time I reckon we should call it what it is. You are killing something when you have an abortion and it's not a horse, it's a human. These are the utilitarian ethical choices that humans and other animals make on a daily basis.
Maria_Vanessa
Member
I agree. Which is why I wish this country was focused more on sex education instead or trying to shame and lecture teenagers and adults into not having sex. People aren't going to stop having sex, so we might as well provide condoms and birth control to inhibit the rate of unwanted pregnancies.
Oh I dont deny it was enjoyable. The thing is .. it was to easy. Just like before when you started explaining history and taxes to me. Oh Im sure you havent forgot and niether have I... I miss those quotes.
I gave you examples of descrimination that goes on, on a daily basis. This is directly related to the accusations you have made against Rand Paul. You have called the man a bigot and racist. You have shown in doing so that it is you that is the racist and bigot imo. Its only racist and/or bigoted opinions that would lead one to such a conclusion in my opinion.
One day you may understand the machine that you empower but for now Ill just use you as my progressive liberal compass on issues. I think your a very partisan person that cannot understand that some people actually just look at the issues objectively.
As I said in my post I respect your opinion and welcome it. Only thing I would ask is that you be more direct and less twisting.
Maria_Vanessa, thank you for that. I'm always open to correction, as long as one commits to correcting me rather than attacking me personally. I only found that link a few hours ago and didn't spend much time looking into the website itself. However, I feel much of what was said in the link had merit. Particularly the part about the 14th amendment's intent in preventing states from denying citizenship to freed slaves who were born in America.
I'm off to read more about the Wong Kim Ark case, I'll bounce back by if I have anything interesting to say on the matter.
I'm off to read more about the Wong Kim Ark case, I'll bounce back by if I have anything interesting to say on the matter.
Glen Beck
Intelligent retort...I read and watch alot of things. Oh noes .. let me give you a hint here. Its not me thats having a problem coming up with origninal thoughts and backing my positions. Its not me bringing 'party lines' and 'talking points' into this thread only my actual opinion and understanding. I believe I told you this before but when your positions are your own they are much easier to defend.
Glenn Beck shames people like Disco.
Maria_Vanessa
Member
Anytime. I like to debate and talk, as long as all parties remain civil and respectful of the opinions being stated.
Most importantly, I like to listen to others and hear their opinions.In general, I like Fred Elbel's page. Unlike most people who rant and rave about illegal immigration, at least he stated some facts on his page about part of the history of the 14th Amendment, instead of trying to pass off his personal opinions as fact.
But, it would have been better if he had simply stated who he was and what connections he has to the national immigration debate. I personally don't care what his stance is, but to me, it seems like a person is hiding something when they don't declare that they are a part of an organization that is presently and currenting lobbying for one viewpoint. Because there are people in this country who are looking for the truth and it's disappointing when people are swayed by false information in the form of pretty words on someone's blog.
And this is what angers me when I hear about the whole "conservative/Republican vs Liberal/Democrat" thing. As far as I am concerned, both parties and ideologies have greatly compromised this country to maintain their own stranglehold of power, money and influence.
If a circus clown shames you then I could see your (self) logic.
LOL... DB 'how can i win'
'oh i know ill insert something and try again'
Who said anything about justification except you? you crack me up man
'oh i know ill insert something and try again'
Who said anything about justification except you? you crack me up man
It ain't winning or losing. I don't care what you think and you're not some kind of movement voice. You're just a propaganda mouthpiece. I'm not keeping score on your behalf. You're fun the commercial breaks though.
Glen Beck? I can see him all bug-eyed and hyperventilating, telling the audience anything that will confuse as many as possibletexicannibus said:
I'm not too stupid to realize you didn't answer the question. And the idea that laws don't stop it make it your right doesn't flush. I don't care where you read it.
I wish you would have watched Glenn Beck today, Disco. I would love to hear your take on any part of today's presentation.
You don't have the balls to throw your analysis on his presentations. You really have no clue what he presents, all you know is to parrot the party line.
Give us some examples of his confusing us, dipshit. You don't have it in you. I get tired of all talk folks like you...can't wait for the opportunity to throw stones at any conservative figurehead, but when it comes down to it, you simply cannot match up in the arena of ideas. You are a weak and narrow minded individual, and don't have a hair on your ass if you don't once and for all show us your evidence that Beck is misleading or misrepresenting anything.
No, you won't even attempt it. Basically, you have no sack. A eunuch that is property of the state.
You don't have the balls to throw your analysis on his presentations. You really have no clue what he presents, all you know is to parrot the party line.
Give us some examples of his confusing us, dipshit. You don't have it in you. I get tired of all talk folks like you...can't wait for the opportunity to throw stones at any conservative figurehead, but when it comes down to it, you simply cannot match up in the arena of ideas. You are a weak and narrow minded individual, and don't have a hair on your ass if you don't once and for all show us your evidence that Beck is misleading or misrepresenting anything.
No, you won't even attempt it. Basically, you have no sack. A eunuch that is property of the state.
Glenn Beck is pure disinformation propaganda. He's an abomination to intellectual conservatives. He is a political operative in the war for you mind.
He tells you to "hate" truthers. Why would someone tell you to "hate" somebody else for asking reasonable questions? Hate Hoosier. Do you understand the implications of using that rhetoric on the the masses such as yourself? Do you understand the psychology of mass hate? He wants his viewers to hate. Excuse me while I remove my head from my conspiracy ass. It's stuck like mo fo.
Last edited:
- Status
