Let's try a new way of discussing immigration..

[iplaw]

quote:
Done me better than you might imagine. I should like to know how exactly it is a poor analogy.

The doctrine of attractive nuisance applies only to children.  Because children are easily distracted by sometimes inherently dangerous objects it becomes the responsibilty of the adult who owns said object to keep children away.  Attractive nuisance really echos the idea that children are inherent incompent as it relates to appreciating and understanding dangers.  It's an issue of imposing protection on those who don't possess the mental faculties to protect themselves from obvious dangers.

You're getting confused by the word "attractive."  Yes, America is "attractive" which makes people want to come here, but there are no dangers we're bound to protect them against.  We owe no illegal immigrant a duty to protect them from the fact that their homeland is a 3rd world dump, and America looks like paradise.

Plus the doctrine itself has balancing provisions in it, but I won't go there.

quote:
Why would the US Citizen child of illegals be less American than the rest of you? If you take a strict constructionalist view of the Constitution, are not all born here equally Americans?

Are you a strict constructionalist by philosophy or only when it suits your purposes?

quote:
So far you've only disagreed with me, but not offered any of your own arguments. Pray, dazzle us with your brillance Herr Doktor Rechtsanwalt.

No thanks.  Given my opinion on the topic a few dozen times, the search feature should give you enough information to satisfy your curiosity.

[Conan71]

Well, I see Chicken Little completely twisted off last week.  Glad I brought back some sugary white sand to pound into a rat hole.

I also see as per usual, that our latest immigration discussion as gone absolutely no where and IP is picking up more fans.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Well, I see Chicken Little completely twisted off last week.  Glad I brought back some sugary white sand to pound into a rat hole.

I also see as per usual, that our latest immigration discussion as gone absolutely no where and IP is picking up more fans.

[]

[Der Teufel]

IP:

You win. (I expect you don't hear that too often). You win.

I haven't the slightest interest in searching through your past posts.  Perhaps you should change the name IPLAW to ILLAW for intellectually lazy).

Ciao bello,

[Chicken Little]

Conan,

We're still wondering if you two (you, and our friend IP) are U.S. citizens.  If so, then why?  What's your claim?  It's apparently a real stumper for you guys; we've been waiting.[]

[Conan71]

Sorry for making you wait.  

I tried to illegaly migrate to the Mexican Riviera last week.  Didn't work.  They have certain procedures in place to keep Americans from having any rights, access to healthcare without a pocket-full of cash, a job, and even if my wife had given birth there, the child  wouldn't have been given automatic citizenship.  If I'd have pissed on a street corner I'd still be in jail.

Pretty much a bust.

Sorry the citizenship quandry is keeping you up at night.  As a child of American citizens, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, I'm a citizen.  Pretty tough to figure out, eh?

[Lister]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Sorry for making you wait.  

I tried to illegaly migrate to the Mexican Riviera last week.  Didn't work.  They have certain procedures in place to keep Americans from having any rights, access to healthcare without a pocket-full of cash, a job, and even if my wife had given birth there, the child  wouldn't have been given automatic citizenship.  If I'd have pissed on a street corner I'd still be in jail.

Pretty much a bust.

Sorry the citizenship quandry is keeping you up at night.  As a child of American citizens, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, I'm a citizen.  Pretty tough to figure out, eh?

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by Der Teufel
I haven't the slightest interest in searching through your past posts.  Perhaps you should change the name IPLAW to ILLAW for intellectually lazy).

The irony in your posts is just delightful.  Thanks for the laughs.

Have anything of substance to add or are you just here to flame?  Your obsession with me is bordering on pathetic.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Sorry for making you wait.  

I tried to illegaly migrate to the Mexican Riviera last week.  Didn't work.  They have certain procedures in place to keep Americans from having any rights, access to healthcare without a pocket-full of cash, a job, and even if my wife had given birth there, the child  wouldn't have been given automatic citizenship.  If I'd have pissed on a street corner I'd still be in jail.

Pretty much a bust.

Sorry the citizenship quandry is keeping you up at night.  As a child of American citizens, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, I'm a citizen.  Pretty tough to figure out, eh?

Yeah...sorry Chicken, thought we both clearly answered that question last week, but nice summary Conan.

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

...As a child of American citizens, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, I'm a citizen.  Pretty tough to figure out, eh?...

That's not what the law says.  The 14th Amendment says, "all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof shall be citizens of the United States and of the State in which they reside."

"Stars and Stripes Forever" mp3

A child born to diplomats would not be "subject to the jurisdiction".  But, children born to all others are born Americans.  While it may be "nifty" that your parents were born here, unless they themselves were born to diplomatic employees, their status is immaterial.  In fact, pick a status: US citizen, legal alien, illegal alien, foreign national living here illegally, resident, or nonresident alien...unless they are diplomatic employees, they are all subject to the laws of this country.  And no matter how you slice it, if they have kids here, their kids are 100%, true-blue Americans.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

...As a child of American citizens, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, I'm a citizen.  Pretty tough to figure out, eh?...

That's not what the law says.  The 14th Amendment says, "all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof shall be citizens of the United States and of the State in which they reside."

"Stars and Stripes Forever" mp3

A child born to diplomats would not be "subject to the jurisdiction".  But, children born to all others are born Americans.  While it may be "nifty" that your parents were born here, unless they themselves were born to diplomatic employees, their status is immaterial.  In fact, pick a status: US citizen, legal alien, illegal alien, foreign national living here illegally, resident, or nonresident alien...unless they are diplomatic employees, they are all subject to the laws of this country.  And no matter how you slice it, if they have kids here, their kids are 100%, true-blue Americans.

Please start at the end of page one and continue on.  I gave my explaination for this three weeks ago.

[Breadburner]

Looks like the sock puppets are out in force......

[kakie]

This article still haunts me today and shows you how bad "cheap labor" can affect legal citizens.

April 10, 2006
Arrival of illegal aliens ousts U.S. workers

By Jerry Seper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published April 10, 2006

Linda Swope, who operates Complete Employment Services Inc. in Mobile, Ala., told The Washington Times last week that the workers --
whom she described as U.S. citizens, residents of Alabama and predominantly black -- had been "urgently requested" by contractors hired to rebuild and clear devastated areas of the state, but were told to leave three job sites when the foreign workers showed up.

"After Katrina, our company had 70 workers on the job the first day, but the companies decided they didn't need them anymore because
the Mexicans had arrived," Mrs. Swope said. "I assure you it is not true that Americans don't want to work.

"We had been told that 270 jobs might be available, and we could have filled every one of them with men from this area, most of whom lost their jobs because of the hurricane," she said. "When we told the guys they would not be needed, they actually cried ... and we cried with them. This is a shame."

Mrs. Swope said employment agencies throughout Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi faced similar problems, when thousands of men from
Mexico and several Central and South American countries -- many in crowded buses and trucks -- came into the three states after Katrina,
looking for employment and willing to work for less money.

The number of foreign workers who flooded the area after the hurricane has been estimated at more than 30,000. Many of them have been identified by law-enforcement authorities and others as illegal aliens.

The Gulf Coast Latin American Association noted in a report that whether those workers will remain after the cleanup work is completed is
not clear, but the longer those jobs last, the more likely it is that the workers will settle permanently. After Hurricane Andrew hit
southeastern Florida in 1992, the association said, the construction boom attracted large numbers of Hispanic immigrants to several areas, including Homestead, Fla., where the Latino population doubled during the 1990s.
Many of the illegal aliens came into the Gulf Coast states not only from south of the border but also from California, Arizona and Texas,
responding to the demand for workers. U.S. Border Patrol officials in the three states have reported an increase in the number of illegals apprehended.

Some of the migrants who did get jobs in the Gulf states also were mistreated, records show. Two class-action lawsuits are pending in federal court in New Orleans in which thousands of migrant workers said they never were paid, although many worked 12-hour shifts, seven days a week and were required to remove toxic contamination from hurricane-ravaged buildings.
Some of the named companies were working on contracts from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and other government agencies.

Government estimates put at 400,000 the number of jobs lost in the Gulf region as a result of Katrina, which displaced more than 1.5
million people, and many of those workers left the area to seek employment elsewhere because available construction, laborer and cleanup
jobs in Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi had been filled by foreign workers, including illegal aliens.

President Bush last week signed the Katrina Emergency Assistance Act of 2006, which extended for 13 weeks unemployment compensation
benefits to more than 140,000 residents of the Gulf states who were displaced from their jobs by Katrina. Their benefits, funded by FEMA,
had expired March 4. Would-be employers in Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi, awash in cleanup and reconstruction jobs, faced little in the way of legal problems in hiring the illegal aliens after Katrina because the Department of Homeland Security temporarily suspended the sanctioning of employers who hired workers unable to document their citizenship.

Mr. Bush also had suspended the Davis-Bacon Act, which requires local contractors to pay "prevailing" wages, in the areas hit by Katrina to encourage reconstruction and cleanup.

"The men we sent to jobs in Alabama were local fellows looking for work, men who needed jobs," Mrs. Swope said. "After driving 50 miles to
the work sites where they had been promised $10 an hour, they discovered the employers had found substitutes who were willing to work
for less."

[Chicken Little]

No, IP.  You ducked this.  You said that your your claim to citizenship wasn't a "valid question".  And, you have dodged this question many times.  I don't care how boring this thread gets. I'll keep asking you because it's a fair question.  And it's pertinent.  

You see, I believe that your only claim to citizenship is the circumstances of your birth.  So, I'd like to know how you think someone who is entered this world under exactly the same legal circumstances would deserve lesser treatment.  

I'd like to know why you are different.
I'd like to know how you are different.
I'd like to know why you think it's okay to demean other Americans.  To suggest that they have a lesser claim.  That they might be less deserving than you, or frankly, your foreign buddy.  How do you justify this epithet, i.e., calling them "anchor babies"?  How does your foreign buddy react when you talk like that?

You can't cook up a legal angle, this is all 101 stuff.  So, I'll let you off the hook there.  But, morally speaking, that little brown baby is your countryman, right?  

Respek to Conan for actually providing an answer.  I think it's funny that Conan believes he's some special strain of American because his parents and great-grandparents were Americans, too.  I keep picturing  him dressed like Mr. Howell, sitting on a yacht, plugging away on a laptop. []  

But, you know better, IP.  You know the law and yet you still think it's okay to behave this way. Why?

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

No, IP.  You ducked this.  You said that your your claim to citizenship wasn't a "valid question".  And, you have dodged this question many times.  I don't care how boring this thread gets. I'll keep asking you because it's a fair question.  And it's pertinent.  

You see, I believe that your only claim to citizenship is the circumstances of your birth.  So, I'd like to know how you think someone who is entered this world under exactly the same legal circumstances would deserve lesser treatment.  

I'd like to know why you are different.
I'd like to know how you are different.
I'd like to know why you think it's okay to demean other Americans.  To suggest that they have a lesser claim.  That they might be less deserving than you, or frankly, your foreign buddy.  How do you justify this epithet, i.e., calling them "anchor babies"?  How does your foreign buddy react when you talk like that?

You can't cook up a legal angle, this is all 101 stuff.  So, I'll let you off the hook there.  But, morally speaking, that little brown baby is your countryman, right?  

Respek to Conan for actually providing an answer.  I think it's funny that Conan believes he's some special strain of American because his parents and great-grandparents were Americans, too.  I keep picturing  him dressed like Mr. Howell, sitting on a yacht, plugging away on a laptop. []  

But, you know better, IP.  You know the law and yet you still think it's okay to behave this way. Why?

Are you ****ting me or are you really that glib.

Same legal circumstances?  What about the parent being an undocumented alien in the commission of a crime against the citizens of the United States?

How you arrive at any sort of correlation between someone who had the good fortune to be born to someone being able to keep their legs together just long enough to deliver a baby at some **** hole hospital in McAllen, Tx. to my grandfather who was born on the family farm in Nebraska is beyond me.

The main reason the anchor baby was born here in the first place was the family used it as an angle for quatro or ocho familias to become de-facto "citizens" of the U.S.

Comparing someone who purposefully broke the law to exploit the generosity of the American Government to my parents or your parents is outrageous.

Thurston Howell?  Something special?  No.  I'm just sick and ****ing tired of the mentality of our Congress and some mindless nitwits who figure a billion $$ here and a billion $$ there doesn't affect their lives because most liberals don't write the check to the gov't at the end of the year, or don't bother to look at how much damn money the government sucks out of their paycheck every week to help support people who exploit the government.