patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,248,717 comments by 14,891 users - 6DOF, Blue, desertguy, Misc online now
Poll: Strong support for some undocumented residents becoming citizens
invite response
2013 Feb 22, 1:26am 17,956 views 102 comments
« First « Previous Comments 17 - 56 of 102 Next » Last » Search these comments
Someone born in the USA is a US citizen-per our constitution.
We do not have jurisdiction over Mexican citizens per their and our own laws...
no.. not everyone born in the USA is a US citizen.. since they were NOT
registered as being here to begin with.. and therefore under foreign jurisdiction. Our Constitution repeatedly talks of jurisdictions.. read it some time...
As is the case of some traveler passing through the US from one end to another.. say Mexico to Canada doesnt mean their newborn is automatic US Citizen.
unless you are ready to arbitrarily kidnap foreign nationalists and strip them of their
inalienable rights they were born with..... so they can vote for your party!
some real extreme case of voter fraud wouldnt you say...
lostand confused
2013 Feb 22, 2:01pm
since they were NOT
registered as being here to begin with.. and therefore
under foreign jurisdiction. Our Constitution repeatedly talks of jurisdictions..
read it some time...
Why is it that tea party types love to wallow in ignorance and then quote the constitution-making such a mockery of it. Or do you just enjoy trolling. How on earth does Mexico have jurisdiction on US soil?? Now if it were an embassy or certain places-like where McCain was born in Panama-yes that is considered soveriegn territory. But otherwise Mexico does not have jurisdiction in the US.
Are you now claiming that if a Mexican citizen is wanted there and he flees to the USA, then Mexican police and army can cross over here and arrest him?? Mexico's jurisdiction ends in Mexico-end of matter. The USA may be obligated by the treaties they have signed-but again it is an option/agreement and vice versa.
Sigh...
lostand confused
2013 Feb 22, 2:10pm
Now on the other hand, if the US does not have birth right citizenship-then they would not be citizens. Some European countries have that-where at least one parent is required to be a citizen-for the child to be a citizen. Else, even if you are born there, you are not a citizen and that is the law. Japan is quite similar in that regard I believe.
Why is it that tea party types love to wallow in ignorance and then quote the constitution-making such a mockery of it. Or do you just enjoy trolling. How on earth does Mexico have jurisdiction on US soil?? Now if it were an embassy or certain places-like where McCain was born in Panama-yes that is considered soveriegn territory. But otherwise Mexico does not have jurisdiction in the US.
sorry charlie.. not a Tea Party member! but have best wishes for them.
again.. so some research before spouting off the dead end...
The same what is true with US citizens who have a birth overseas.. the child is citizen of the US. It need not be considered soveriegn territory.
has been true since 1790...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790
"the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens".
it is still true today...
Are you now claiming that if a Mexican citizen is wanted there and he flees to the USA, then Mexican police and army can cross over here and arrest him?? Mexico's jurisdiction ends in Mexico-end of matter. The USA may be obligated by the treaties they have signed-but again it is an option/agreement and vice versa.
Sigh...
did you bother to ready up their constitution regarding birth to mexican citizens ?
I will repost..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_nationality_law#Nationality_by_birth
Nationality by birth (According to the 30th article of the Constitution of Mexico, there are two ways in which a person can acquire the Mexican nationality, by birth and by naturalization)
The constitution declares that Mexicans by birth (born Mexicans) include the following:[1]
individuals born in Mexican territory regardless of the nationality of their parents;
individuals born abroad if one or both of their parents was a Mexican national born in Mexican territory;
individuals born abroad if one or both of their parents was a Mexican national by naturalization; and
individuals born in Mexican merchant or Navy ships or Mexican merchant or Army aircraft
We do not have jurisdiction over Mexican citizens per their and our own laws...
no.. not everyone born in the USA is a US citizenThe supreme court has already decided they are, so dipstick wong is wrong again... like usual.
and your source is ?
Some people have no citizenship because the country they were bored in doesn't give citizenship.
Their parents' country doesn't give citizenship if you don't bore on its land.
Now if it were an embassy or certain places-like where McCain was born in Panama-yes that is considered soveriegn territory
actually not the case until 1937 regarding citizenship. it wasnt sovereign territory..perhaps not even the Philippine bases were either.
thomaswrong: the child can choose, as both countries have laws granting the child citizenship.
mr wrong: are you too stupid or lazy to look up the relevant case law?
here, I'll help:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause#Court_decisions
and you pull up a case of which the parents who were registered US permanent residents.. who legally entered the US who had a child within the borders legally.
this is different from both current laws for both Mexican Citizens and US laws
concerning illegal residents... else why do we deport them back ?
Bubbabeefcake
2013 Feb 22, 2:38pm
all of the invader spawn
....oh and yes they do multiply like roaches
But I suppose others are seemingly content with criminal migration in this country .... that speaks volumes of character in itself
mr wrong: are you too stupid or lazy to look up the relevant case law?
it seems your the one wrong.. but no surprise there!
The whole idea of making some human beings "illegal" is absurd. Our rights are born with us when are born as human beings, not granted by government. The government simply has no say over who is "illegal" for being; our rights should not be defined by bureaucratic documents. There should be no "status" except for everyone being equal in front of the law. There is Constitutional prohibition against rank and title.
From a practical perspective, laws that ban "illegal" human beings are bound to be even harder to enforce and would require even more cumbersome and costly bureaucracy than war on "illegal" drugs . . . because human beings are even more mobile than drugs: human beings have legs and can move themselves without help. Any law or bureaucracy to seriously enforce against that natural right mobility is bound to be extremely intrusive to people who seek to benefit from the superior status of being "legal" to begin with.
Yeah. calling people "invader spawn" and "cockroaches" not only makes you a raving racist,
what do you call the so called Coyote smugglers...who kill and rape their prey...
how about we call it "human trafficking" much of it with huge loans to pay off
either with criminal activity like drug smuggling and prostitution within our borders.
Its a global problem.. be it Africa, Asia, Europe or North America.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_smuggling
Picture of smuggled persons deported and brought back to Pakistan. Picture belongs to Ansar Burney Trust - but I can use it can be used as long as credit is given to them.
Human trafficking and sex slavery in human trafficking are largely the result of government laws against migration. The enslavement usually consists of taking away the document paper. The dynamics of human trafficking is very similar to drug trafficking: prohibition leads to criminality.
The whole idea of making some human beings "illegal" is absurd.
People smuggling between the United States and Mexico is a booming business that, as of 2003, garnered over $5 billion a year.[8] Similarly, in the EU, profits from people smuggling operations is estimated to be around €4 billion per year.
People smuggling is a dangerous operation and has frequently resulted in the death of those individuals being smuggled. In 2004, 464 recorded deaths took place during the crossing from Mexico to the United States, and each year, an estimated 2000 people drown in the Mediterranean on the journey from Africa into Europe.[9]
Human trafficking and sex slavery in human trafficking are largely the result of government laws against migration. The enslavement usually consists of taking away the document paper. The dynamics of human trafficking is very similar to drug trafficking: prohibition is the cause of criminality.
robertoaribas
The modern day slave trade !! acceptable to allow slavery to exist in the USA !!
where is your Progressive Outrage over this immortality as our Borders are Invaded
with this immoral practice and bondage over your brother and sisters !!!
Bubbabeefcake
2013 Feb 22, 2:54pm
Where would our country be without the inherent contribution from our prison industrial complex
Study Shows Sharp Rise in Latino Federal Convicts
Latino convicts now represent the largest ethnic population in the federal prison system, accounting for 40 percent of those convicted of federal crimes,
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/19/us/19immig.html
The modern day slave trade !! acceptable to allow slavery to exist in the USA !!
where is your Progressive Outrage over this immortality as our Borders are Invaded
with this immoral practice and bondage over your brother and sisters !!!
It is not invasion because the arriving do not seek political overlordship over the existing population.
Slavery in human trafficking is largely the result of laws against migration that strips natural rights from migrants and place them in a lower and vulnerable legal status. That's why the typical slavers take away the victims' "papers" and threaten to call the police as their enforcers.
The sad thing is that, just as libertarians argued for a long time that slavery would be hard to enforce without slave-return laws enforced by the government, the immigration police is being used by the slavers and human traffickers as slave-return service.
The sad thing is that, just as libertarians argued for a long time that slavery would be hard to enforce without slave-return laws enforced by the government, the immigration police is being used by the slavers and human traffickers as slave-return service.
that leaves .. building a freaking tall strong wall and policing our borders to stop this.
that leaves .. building a freaking tall strong wall and policing our borders to stop this.
Neither the wall nor the staff to patrol it is free.
The real solution is: reducing welfare, combined with free migration! If the migrant worker knows he/she can come back easily the next time, then he/she is far more likely to voluntarily move back to Mexico (or whatever other country) during our recession, to spend more time with his/her family in a place where cost of living is lower. When the next time our economy is booming, more labor is needed, they can come back to build more houses or whatever else. This easy migration policy would also shunt out the "illegal"/legally unemployable youth from becoming foot soldiers to gangs just to make a living and stay in this country.
It isn't a CRIMINAL act to be here illegally,
LOL! lovely! see the deportations made by mexico on their southern borders...
Not to mention that new tall fench with barbs they are putting up manned with troops.
Guess the Mexican are racists too i guess sending all those illegals back home...
no talk in Mexico about 'pathway to citizenship" or "amnesty"
You can pretty much see many other nations making sure illegal criminal activity is stopped.
make a reasonable policy for immigrants, and 99% of the human smuggling goes away.
we have a reasonable immigration policy that has worked well over the years... and many from all over the world have filed their paper work and will enter legally.
50% of illegal immigrants overstay a visa. They came in legally... and just didn't leave. How does your wall stop that?
I would stick a $500 bounty on their head.. could create a great new industry...
Alive of course.. $500 collected from the illegal immigrant captured. Not taxpayer funded.
'Bounty hunters' hired to track down illegal immigrants
More than 170,000 immigrants refused leave to stay in Britain are to be tracked down by private-sector “bounty huntersâ€.
The support services firm Capita will earn up to £40million if it finds all of the migrants identified by the UK Border Agency who may be living in the country illegally.
But it was claimed by MPs that the company will be “laughing all the way to the bank†as its four-year contract does not specify how many people it has to remove.
Rob Whiteman, chief executive of UKBA, told the Home Affairs Select Committee: “The contract is on payment by results, where they will make contact with potential overstayers from our records.
“The potential value of the contract, if they performed very well over a four-year period, would be around £40 million.
Bubbabeefcake
2013 Feb 22, 3:38pm
calling people roaches...
I never called anyone a name but only insinuated their breeding patterns and if criminal is to harsh of a term for you , I"ll just express the term LAWLESSNESS to which Hispanics are a major contributor of our nations prison industrial complex
when people come in illegally and in such numbers they do not or will not assimilate I.E. american culture, language, etc. they are a threat to the american society as a whole. this propaganda about "there is no illegal people" is b.s. propaganda plain and simple. the only people who can argue the obvious are the people violating our immigration laws or their offspring. but, that is human nature. if I were mexican I would jump the border too. free medical ,welfare, make sure to have a kid and your home free. school and hiring preference,etc. the real question is why our government turns its back and allows illegal aliens? that is where the problem lies is our failure of a government. I am rapidly losing faith in whats left of this country. they have done nothing for years and now try to say its to late to do anything. why?
the real question is why our government turns its back and allows illegal aliens? that is where the problem lies is our failure of a government. I am rapidly losing faith in whats left of this country. they have done nothing for years and now try to say its to late to do anything. why?
well lucky for us the Mexican Government has put up a southern borders fence manned by armed troops to stop illegal trespassing onto their territory...
they have also instituted voter ID cards...
they also managed to get foreign investments to build factories to build stuff to sell
to the rest of the world increasing incomes for their people....
Govt dont seem to be concerned over global warming either...
Sounds like they are doing some things right as we just sit there listening to some
Liberals about human rights, global warming... and how to go Vegan!
Key Findings
Illegal immigration costs U.S. taxpayers about $113 billion a year at the federal, state and local level. The bulk of the costs — some $84 billion — are absorbed by state and local governments.
The annual outlay that illegal aliens cost U.S. taxpayers is an average amount per native-headed household of $1,117. The fiscal impact per household varies considerably because the greatest share of the burden falls on state and local taxpayers whose burden depends on the size of the illegal alien population in that locality
Education for the children of illegal aliens constitutes the single largest cost to taxpayers, at an annual price tag of nearly $52 billion. Nearly all of those costs are absorbed by state and local governments.
http://www.fairus.org/publications/the-fiscal-burden-of-illegal-immigration-on-u-s-taxpayers
lostand confused
2013 Feb 22, 8:15pm
sorry charlie.. not a Tea Party member! but have best wishes for them.
again.. so some research before spouting off the dead end...
The same what is true with US citizens who have a birth overseas.. the child
is citizen of the US. It need not be considered soveriegn territory.
has been true since 1790...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790
"the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea,
or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born
Citizens".
it is still true today...
You of all people should be asking someone to do some research. Considering you spout rubbish and stick to it all costs. What part of being born in the US making you a US citizen do you not get. Just because you have a belief, does not make it fact. Reasearch before posting gibberish. Why does Mexico giving someone citizenship affect what happens to a US citizen here? They are a US citizen and if Mexico gives them citizenship-then they are a dual citizen. Lets see what gibberish you come up with now to support your crazy beliefs-you may not be a teabagger-but you act like one that has a sign saying-get the gubmnt off my medicare.thomaswong.1986 says
actually not the case until 1937 regarding citizenship. it wasnt sovereign
territory..perhaps not even the Philippine bases were either.
In the land of fruits and nuts as usual. You know this is 2013-since 1937 many things have happened, Nazism was defeated and so was Hitler. A new nation called Israel was born, the Soviet Union collapsed, man landed on the moon , we now have satellites up in the sky , the Germany split and merged again and we even dropped an atomic bomb on Japan.
Illegal immigration costs U.S. taxpayers about $113 billion a year at the federal, state and local level. The bulk of the costs — some $84 billion — are absorbed by state and local governments.
The solution to government waste is not to introduce more government waste. What you are suggesting is essentially equivalent to: because the government wastes a lot of money overpaying road building, let's waste more money banning cars!
The annual outlay that illegal aliens cost U.S. taxpayers is an average amount per native-headed household of $1,117. The fiscal impact per household varies considerably because the greatest share of the burden falls on state and local taxpayers whose burden depends on the size of the illegal alien population in that locality
The bulk of that money is paid to American citizens who hold government jobs. The "illegal aliens" are just an excuse for such transfers.
Education for the children of illegal aliens constitutes the single largest cost to taxpayers, at an annual price tag of nearly $52 billion. Nearly all of those costs are absorbed by state and local governments.
In other words, it's Americans paying Americans in an inefficient educational monopoly. Do you actually believe any of the students in the public school system is getting the money's worth in brainwashing?
well lucky for us the Mexican Government has put up a southern borders fence manned by armed troops to stop illegal trespassing onto their territory...
they have also instituted voter ID cards...
If you are so fond of Mexican government policies like that, what exactly are you afraid of Mexican being "unAmerican" again?
what exactly are you afraid of Mexican being "unAmerican" again?
at what point am i being afraid... perhaps the question should be
Since when did the liberals in the US began re-writing both the US and Mexican
Constitution to suite their world view or should I say "fantasy" ? And by what authority do they have to do so ?
What part of being born in the US making you a US citizen do you not get. Just because you have a belief, does not make it fact. Reasearch before posting gibberish. Why does Mexico giving someone citizenship affect what happens to a US citizen here? They are a US citizen and if Mexico gives them citizenship-then they are a dual citizen.
The so called facts you provide are linked to individuals who immigrated to the US legally.
The question that remains is for those who are NOT here legally...
DO NOT TRY TO CONFUSE people with legal immigrants vs illegal aliens who are
citizens of foreign nations.. as are their offspring.. regardless if they were born here.
lostand confused
2013 Feb 23, 10:59am
DO NOT TRY TO CONFUSE people with legal immigrants vs illegal aliens who are
citizens of foreign nations.. as are their offspring.. regardless if they
were born here.
You are entitled to your opinion , but not your facts.
at what point am i being afraid... perhaps the question should be
Since when did the liberals in the US began re-writing both the US and Mexican
Constitution to suite their world view or should I say "fantasy" ? And by what authority do they have to do so ?
I have no idea what the Mexican constitution says, but in the US Constitution, there is no legal authority granted to federal government for impeding individual mobility. Therefore the natural right of mobility is reserved to the individual according to the 9th Amendment.
There had been no legal restriction against immigration in the US until the late 19th century communistic labor union movement.
You are entitled to your opinion , but not your facts.
facts are based on legal immigrants who come to the USA...
you are misrepresenting those facts to include "foreign citizens" and calling them
immigrants when they legally are not...
trespassing or visitors....
a person, who enters you home without permission is a "illegal trespassing" since
he had no authority to enter into your property without your explicit instructions.
in YOUR SCREWED UP WORLD VIEW .. they are visitors, and therefore committed
no violation or crime. In fact, you as a property owner have no right to throw them out of
your own property.
lostand confused
2013 Feb 23, 11:13am
you are misrepresenting those facts to include "foreign citizens" and calling
them
immigrants when they legally are not...
Where have I called them immigrants?
in YOUR SCREWED UP WORLD VIEW .. they are visitors, and therefore committed
no violation or crime. In fact, you as a property owner have no right to
throw them out of
your own property.
Where have I said that- you hearing voices again??
I have no idea what the Mexican constitution says, but in the US Constitution, there is no legal authority granted to federal government for impeding individual mobility. Therefore the natural right of mobility is reserved to the individual according to the 9th Amendment.
US Constitution applies to US citizens.. not foreign citizens. Where does the rights of US citizens in the Constitution apply to foreign citizens.
Where have I said that- you hearing voices again??
so much for the idiotic socialist one world view...
a person, who enters you home without permission is a "illegal trespassing" since
he had no authority to enter into your property without your explicit instructions.
in YOUR SCREWED UP WORLD VIEW .. they are visitors, and therefore committed
no violation or crime. In fact, you as a property owner have no right to throw them out of
your own property.
It is actually a very collectivist approach to view a country's land as "collectively owned" instead of "un-owned" altogether. Do you think the town plumbers should be able to form a union of their own and make the town pass a law that bans all town residents from contracting out-of-town plumbers? Foreigners in this country are not automatically trespassers; they are usually the guests, business associates or counter-parties of citizens in this country . . . just like out-of-town plumbers are usually in town to do business with residents, and in-town plumbers have no right to strip fellow residents of that freedom of association on reasons of alleged "collective ownership" of the town.
« First « Previous Comments 17 - 56 of 102 Next » Last » Search these comments
http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=22900