Post #292,456
9/6/07 9:48:23 PM
|
I know...just look at those Democrats
4. Only members of the nation may be citizens of the State. Only those of German blood, whatever be their creed, may be members of the nation. Accordingly, no Jew may be a member of the nation.
5. Non-citizens may live in Germany only as guests and must be subject to laws for aliens
[...]
8. All non-German immigration must be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans who entered Germany after 2 August 1914 shall be required to leave the Reich forthwith.
You know, I think was just a few weeks ago, BP was talking about how Democrats were so against these illegal immigrants and their sanctuary cities. (Geeze, can't you guys get your act together....are Democrats for or against illegal aliens?)
|
Post #292,476
9/6/07 11:11:43 PM
|
sad thing at the am school bus stop
new neighbor has a little girl, takes the bus with my daghter. She makes the little boys who are hispanic wait for the girls to get on first saying "they belong to this country, you dont, they get on first" Every one of those kids, regardless of parents status were born here, same as her. thanx, bill
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari? Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep
reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
|
Post #292,478
9/6/07 11:27:15 PM
|
I was?
I believe there may have been some sarcasm in that post.
I don't like sanctuary policies and believe them to be pushed by liberal orgs.
Have 3 dead college kids up north at the hands of an illegal. I'm not getting any fonder of those policies, I can tell you.
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
|
Post #292,520
9/7/07 7:22:15 PM
|
Got some straw on the cheap?
------
179. I will not outsource core functions. -- [link|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm|.]
|
Post #292,550
9/8/07 8:15:18 AM
|
Straw for straw
we'll break the camel's back.
The Nazi's party line on immigration and citizenship doesn't match with either the supposed Democratic line or even the offical Democratic line. (Insert Leftist for Democratic if you wish)
It does appear to match the Neo-Con line.
|
Post #292,999
9/16/07 1:19:32 AM
|
I think the definition of "American"
is basically "someone who is in country legally" (forgetting the fine details such as voting for a second). What do you think?
------
179. I will not outsource core functions. -- [link|http://omega.med.yale.edu/~pcy5/misc/overlord2.htm|.]
|
Post #293,006
9/16/07 3:52:10 AM
|
An "American" is someone living in this hemisphere
after all, a Brazilian is an American, seeing as they live in South America.
A citizen of the United States of America is rather more specific.
Part of the problem I see with political discourse in North America is the concentration on persons, with not enough talk about citizenship. See, persons have rights, citizens have responsibilities. This works really well for large corporations, as they are persons in the law, and gets people talking about their rights instead of their responsibilities. OTOH, if the discourse is concentrated on citizenship, then the corporations don't really have much to say since they aren't and cannot be citizens.
Now, if I hop across the border to visit Watertown, New York, I'm in the country legally. Does that make me an "American"? It sure doesn't make me a citizen of the US. It also doesn't make me part of the culture that surrounds citizenship in the US.
We gotta spend more time talking about citizenship in our political discourse, because the corporations can't enter that conversation, which means that it's a conversation that happens among human beings, not institutions... after all, the government of Canada is a duly incorporated entity, not a citizen.
|
Post #293,007
9/16/07 6:24:15 AM
|
Define "legally"
Were the Puritans here "legally"? According to whom? What about the Spaniards in Florida? The State of Texas? The Kingdom of Hawaii? is basically "someone who is in country legally" H1B's are Americans? (I don't agree with that statement) None of this matters, btw. As I pointed out, there are those who blame Liberals/Democrats for ignoring American immigration laws (regardless of whether or not they are), Your allegation was that Democrats WERE for strict immigration laws.
|
Post #293,011
9/16/07 10:02:43 AM
|
we should change the discourse from illegal workers
to illegal employers, without the latter folks who arnt entitled to work here, wouldnt be here. Shut down the employers and these folks would go elsewhere. thanx, bill
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari? Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep
reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
|