Save Our State  

Go Back   Save Our State > General Forum (non official Save Our State business) > State Government

State Government Issues of importance to SOS associates relating to their state government.

WELCOME BACK!.............NEW EFFORTS AHEAD..........CHECK BACK SOON.........UPDATE YOUR EMAIL FOR NEW NOTIFICATIONS.........
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-22-2010, 01:34 AM
Jeanfromfillmore's Avatar
Jeanfromfillmore Jeanfromfillmore is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,287
Default Eleven States Ready To Adopt Arizona Immigration Laws

Eleven States Ready To Adopt Arizona Immigration Laws
Lawmakers in Alabama, Idaho, Maryland, Oklahoma, Texas and Utah, have indicated that they will push to adopt measures similar to Arizona's tough new immigration laws when they reconvene their next legislative session. Lawmakers in Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Pennsylvania and South Carolina have already introduced "copycat" legislation. The frustration of Washington's inaction and dwindling state treasuries have forced state politicians to take these measures. Lawmakers are also finally heeding their constituent's demands that illegal immigrants face punishments. Many are also tired of illegals marching in the streets with flags from their native countries while snubbing their noses at Old Glory. That has left a bad taste in the mouths of many Americans.
While America is a nation of immigrants, it's people demand that entry into our country must be done legally. Like their forefathers before them, or in some cases, like they have. I fit that demographic. I came to the U.S. in the 1960's and entered legally, given a green card and then had to wait for the right to apply for citizenship. Any other way, is a slap in the face. Amnesties, for instance - are the worst slaps in the face because it rewards a criminal act. Whether we like it or not, America is a nation of laws. True, not all laws are just, but there is a process to repeal bad laws. What supporters of illegal immigration (migration) really want Americans to do, is to ignore our laws and through them all out the window. No way!

Where and when will it stop? When will the definition of illegal not mean what it means anymore? You toss this law away, then another and then another. Before long, there are no more laws. This is not what America stands for. Thankfully, people have drawn a line in the sand and are saying enough is enough already.

We are not opposed to anyone coming to America for a better life, we are opposed to the way they are coming in and then thumbing their noses at the law abiding citizens. It is wrong and you just cannot get away with it any longer. If you want to be an American then you must do it the right way. Any politician, who willfully ignores our laws is not fit to govern. Those politicians must be voted out.

The anger and wrath of the American People is gathering a head of steam that all politicians better heed. Populist movements aren't much concerned about Democrat or Republican values, they are looking for American Values and any politician dumb enough to ignore it, does so at their own risk.

Clearly, a majority of American's support Arizona and its' actions. Five have already enacted copycat legislation while another six are ready to. Before long there will not be many sanctuary states and cities left. If the trend continues, perhaps it will lead to a reverse migration. Maybe that is not a bad thing, either. People will need to re-apply to enter this country in a legal manner and that would be the right way to do it.

There should be no subversion of laws already on the books, period!
http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chic...tion-laws.html
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-22-2010, 07:30 AM
Don Don is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 649
Default

"We are not opposed to anyone coming to America for a better life, we are opposed to the way they are coming in and then thumbing their noses at the law abiding citizens. It is wrong and you just cannot get away with it any longer. If you want to be an American then you must do it the right way. Any politician, who willfully ignores our laws is not fit to govern. Those politicians must be voted out."


It's this kind of confusion that has caused the problem we face. If you are OK with anyone coming here for a better life, you have destroyed your own argument to keep them out. If they have a moral right to come here, you have no moral right to keep them out.

This is our country and they have no right to be here if we say they don't.

I have developed a way to address this kind of moral confusion. When some person, even a well meaning person, spouts this line, I ask: "Are you willing to give up your job so that someone else can have a better life?"

"Are you willing to hand over your house to illegal aliens becuase your house is built on land that was taken from Indians 300 years ago?"


You cannot defeat an enemy by accepting your enemy's moral premises. This is our country. WE have a right to exclude anyone for any reason and if they want a "better life," let them create one in their own land like we did in ours.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-22-2010, 12:28 PM
Twoller Twoller is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,296
Default

Quote:
....

We are not opposed to anyone coming to America for a better life, we are opposed to the way they are coming in and then thumbing their noses at the law abiding citizens. It is wrong and you just cannot get away with it any longer. If you want to be an American then you must do it the right way. Any politician, who willfully ignores our laws is not fit to govern. Those politicians must be voted out.

....
People who come to the US for no other reason than because they want a better life are unfit to be citizens. If anything, they should look to the United States for a better way of living and struggle to build such a place where they are.
__________________
The United States of America is for citizens only! Everyone else OUT.
Criminalize asking party affilation for voter registration! End the "two party system"!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-22-2010, 07:55 PM
rs232c rs232c is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 80
Default

Quote:
While America is a nation of immigrants,
This phrase has confused me for years. I had always believed that we were a nation of citizens not of immigrants.

As for myself I am a sixth generation American and my siblings children the seventh. At what point do we become citizens and no longer immigrants?

I can't see it to mean 'America is a nation built by immigrants' because I recall the study that said 83% of our country was built by citizens and 14% non-citizens.

I have a problem understanding that 'America is a nation that was born of immigrants, therefore we have always come from immigrants, and will always be of immigrants', because the same would be true for the Indian population, which I understand still have soverign nations and are all citizens at birth now anyway.

And last it certainly doesn't make any sense to me to be a citizen in a nation of immigrants, that just doesn't seem to mean anything at all. In my understanding it is valid to be a citizen and 'used to be an immigrant' in a nation of citizens, but not both concurrently.

In my pea-sized brain the only thing that does make sense to me is that it is a policitally correct phrase that defines the status of immigrant and the status of citizenship to be one in the same and indistingusihable.

Are they?

Last edited by rs232c; 05-22-2010 at 08:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-22-2010, 09:12 PM
Jeanfromfillmore's Avatar
Jeanfromfillmore Jeanfromfillmore is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,287
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rs232c View Post
This phrase has confused me for years. I had always believed that we were a nation of citizens not of immigrants.

As for myself I am a sixth generation American and my siblings children the seventh. At what point do we become citizens and no longer immigrants?

I can't see it to mean 'America is a nation built by immigrants' because I recall the study that said 83% of our country was built by citizens and 14% non-citizens.

I have a problem understanding that 'America is a nation that was born of immigrants, therefore we have always come from immigrants, and will always be of immigrants', because the same would be true for the Indian population, which I understand still have soverign nations and are all citizens at birth now anyway.

And last it certainly doesn't make any sense to me to be a citizen in a nation of immigrants, that just doesn't seem to mean anything at all. In my understanding it is valid to be a citizen and 'used to be an immigrant' in a nation of citizens, but not both concurrently.

In my pea-sized brain the only thing that does make sense to me is that it is a policitally correct phrase that defines the status of immigrant and the status of citizenship to be one in the same and indistingusihable.

Are they?
I agree with you 100%. The phrase "nation of immigrants" belittles all the that the citizens have in this country and have invested to make it so, as though someone who has just arrived is equal to someone who created Mount Rushmore, or designed the Chrysler Building. Americans invested in what is America, and immigrants aren't truly Americans until they consider they are Americans in their hearts. There's a difference today, a big difference.

Last edited by Jeanfromfillmore; 05-23-2010 at 11:19 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-23-2010, 05:46 AM
PochoPatriot PochoPatriot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 336
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don View Post
It's this kind of confusion that has caused the problem we face. If you are OK with anyone coming here for a better life, you have destroyed your own argument to keep them out. If they have a moral right to come here, you have no moral right to keep them out.
Two questions:
1. How does being supportive of legal immigration destroy an argument against illegal immigration?

2. Where in the quote is a "moral right" to immigration being espoused?
__________________
I think, therefore I love the Dodgers!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-23-2010, 10:35 AM
Kathy63 Kathy63 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 380
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rs232c View Post
This phrase has confused me for years. I had always believed that we were a nation of citizens not of immigrants.

As for myself I am a sixth generation American and my siblings children the seventh. At what point do we become citizens and no longer immigrants?

I can't see it to mean 'America is a nation built by immigrants' because I recall the study that said 83% of our country was built by citizens and 14% non-citizens.

I have a problem understanding that 'America is a nation that was born of immigrants, therefore we have always come from immigrants, and will always be of immigrants', because the same would be true for the Indian population, which I understand still have soverign nations and are all citizens at birth now anyway.

And last it certainly doesn't make any sense to me to be a citizen in a nation of immigrants, that just doesn't seem to mean anything at all. In my understanding it is valid to be a citizen and 'used to be an immigrant' in a nation of citizens, but not both concurrently.

In my pea-sized brain the only thing that does make sense to me is that it is a policitally correct phrase that defines the status of immigrant and the status of citizenship to be one in the same and indistingusihable.

Are they?
You pose an interesting question. The beginnings of every nation do not obligate that nation to forever remain as it was in its inception. Austrialia was a penal colony. It began as a nation of criminals. Should Australia now be obligated to remain a penal colony for the world's worst criminals? Of course not. To even think such a thing is absurd.

The United States was NEVER a nation of immigrants. It was always a nation of AMERICANS. Americans who came here from all nations and all walks of life but who shared one thing in common, to be an AMERICAN. When those Americans came here it was with one mind. To shed old loyalties and embrace fully the American condition. It was easy for them to put aside their own nationality. They came intending to do just that.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-23-2010, 10:45 AM
Don Don is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 649
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PochoPatriot View Post
Two questions:
1. How does being supportive of legal immigration destroy an argument against illegal immigration?

2. Where in the quote is a "moral right" to immigration being espoused?
1. The whole distinction between "illegal" and "legal" immigration is a fig leaf behind which people hide in order to minimize their risk of being called racists. If everyone thinks "legal" immigration is ok, why don't you just support amnesty and bingo: Everyone who came here "illegally" will be "legal" and you should have no more problem with them being here.

The bogus talk about "illegal" vs. "legal" immigration is a white flag of surrender. People who hide behind their support for "legal immigration" are invariably the strongest opponents to "amnesty" that would legalize illegal aliens. And with good reason.

Most people don't object to them being here because they're "illegal". Most people object because illegal aliens are third world primitives and savages who are not compatible with advanced modern civilization. You cannot have a first world country with a third world population. Seriously. Do you think these savages would behave any differently if they were legal? I don't.

If you want confirmation of this, read the LA Times Sunday edition 5.23,10, article about the up and coming industry in Los Angeles: An "academy" for certifying "gang interventionists."

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...ext-crime.html

Teachers are being laid off, but LA is increasing its budget for an "academy" to give "certification" to "gang interventionists" all of whom are former gang members(!) and whose primary job is to try to talk latino gang bangers out of killing each other. Science, math, history, etc., teachers are being laid off for budgetary reasons, but the city has money for former gang bangers who will enjoy full employment at taxpayer expense. I have never seen anything so stupid.

2. The quote does not use the word "moral right", but that is the underlying premise of people who defend immigration of any sort.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-23-2010, 12:41 PM
Twoller Twoller is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,296
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kathy63 View Post
You pose an interesting question. The beginnings of every nation do not obligate that nation to forever remain as it was in its inception. Austrialia was a penal colony. It began as a nation of criminals. Should Australia now be obligated to remain a penal colony for the world's worst criminals? Of course not. To even think such a thing is absurd.

The United States was NEVER a nation of immigrants. It was always a nation of AMERICANS. Americans who came here from all nations and all walks of life but who shared one thing in common, to be an AMERICAN. When those Americans came here it was with one mind. To shed old loyalties and embrace fully the American condition. It was easy for them to put aside their own nationality. They came intending to do just that.
The United States started out, like all of the countries in the Americas, as a colony of some European power. For us, our political ancestors are English, the English were the colonial powers represented in the territories that later became the United States of America. It was the native Americans of North America whose land was colonized by the English and other European powers. But since the native Americans were not a single people and, in fact, suffered migration among themselves, they were in a poor position to describe European colonists as immigrants of any kind. Although, it would be hard to see why the natives would dignify colonization by calling it immigration, even though we do the same thing today with our own immigrant invasion.

Our political ancestors fought a revolution against the colonial English in a dispute over representation and human rights. They lay down their greivances in the Declaration of Independence. They proposed a new vision of society based on citizenship and representative government. In particular, citizenship meant that everyone who lived as a citizen under a government of laws, not people, were equal under the eyes of the law.

Anyone who aspired to relocate into the United States aspired to citizenship. Without assuming the role of citizen, they could not participate in those basic roles that formed the working backbone of life in the United States.

And so it is today. Anyone who aspires to live in the United States outside of the institution of citizenship conspires against the United States and its hard won struggles against the old and degenerate order in Europe which continues to exist and has powerful representation in the United States and the Americas.
__________________
The United States of America is for citizens only! Everyone else OUT.
Criminalize asking party affilation for voter registration! End the "two party system"!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-25-2010, 12:39 PM
PochoPatriot PochoPatriot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 336
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don View Post
1. The whole distinction between "illegal" and "legal" immigration is a fig leaf behind which people hide in order to minimize their risk of being called racists. If everyone thinks "legal" immigration is ok, why don't you just support amnesty and bingo: Everyone who came here "illegally" will be "legal" and you should have no more problem with them being here.
No, actually this is a distinction made by the law. It has nothing to do with being called a "racist". Just because a person supports legal immigration it does not follow that they are for amnesty. Your logic is faulty.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don View Post
The bogus talk about "illegal" vs. "legal" immigration is a white flag of surrender. People who hide behind their support for "legal immigration" are invariably the strongest opponents to "amnesty" that would legalize illegal aliens. And with good reason.
This is such a steaming pile of bovine excrement. I support legal immigration, period. I support people coming to this country who want to fully embrace everything that makes this country great, and will fully assimilate into this culture. However, it does not in any mean that I support amnesty. Once again, your logic, if it can be called that, is in gross error.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don View Post
Most people don't object to them being here because they're "illegal". Most people object because illegal aliens are third world primitives and savages who are not compatible with advanced modern civilization. You cannot have a first world country with a third world population. Seriously. Do you think these savages would behave any differently if they were legal? I don't.
The terms "primitives" and "savages" are highly incendiary, and should not be used in this forum. I realize, however, that this is how they are referred to in your local Klan meeting, but this sort of invective should not be used here.

Second, while it is true that there are a huge percentage of immigrants that come from "third world countries" we have to ask ourselves why that is the case? By far the majority of immigrants leave their countries of origin because they want a better life. If you were on of those "primitives" and "savages" you too would want to get here, and live a life far better than the life you would live in your home country.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don View Post
If you want confirmation of this, read the LA Times Sunday edition 5.23,10, article about the up and coming industry in Los Angeles: An "academy" for certifying "gang interventionists."

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...ext-crime.html

Teachers are being laid off, but LA is increasing its budget for an "academy" to give "certification" to "gang interventionists" all of whom are former gang members(!) and whose primary job is to try to talk latino gang bangers out of killing each other. Science, math, history, etc., teachers are being laid off for budgetary reasons, but the city has money for former gang bangers who will enjoy full employment at taxpayer expense.
I agree, however who better to talk to gangbangers than gangbangers who have seen the error of their ways, and have changed their lives? I don't think you or I would have much credibility in the lives of gangbangers. Whether or not this is a program that the city should be funding during this time is the real debate. As far as teachers go, then perhaps that should be brought up to the LAUSD school board, that has the jurisdiction of those decisions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don View Post
I have never seen anything so stupid.
Obviously you do not read your own posts.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Don View Post
2. The quote does not use the word "moral right", but that is the underlying premise of people who defend immigration of any sort.
So your problem is immigration, period. Why do you fear people from other countries, cultures or elasticities? Immigration has helped this country. Why do I believe that? Quite simply because America is an ideal, and not an ethnicity or race.
__________________
I think, therefore I love the Dodgers!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright SaveOurState ©2009 - 2016 All Rights Reserved