Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member sasquatch672
    Don't Like It Leave
    04 Dec '12 02:21
    http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/11/30/166239067/an-overture-to-latinos-gop-controlled-house-passes-immigration-bill

    The Bill would eliminate the lottery, but would streamline the process for awarding visas to technology workers. Democrats instead want to give the country away by passing the Dream Act, which basically eliminates the border with Mexico because it provides citizenship to illegal immigrants.
  2. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    04 Dec '12 03:00
    Originally posted by sasquatch672
    http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/11/30/166239067/an-overture-to-latinos-gop-controlled-house-passes-immigration-bill

    The Bill would eliminate the lottery, but would streamline the process for awarding visas to technology workers. Democrats instead want to give the country away by passing the Dream Act, which basically eliminates the border with Mexico because it provides citizenship to illegal immigrants.
  3. 04 Dec '12 03:33
    Originally posted by sasquatch672
    http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/11/30/166239067/an-overture-to-latinos-gop-controlled-house-passes-immigration-bill

    The Bill would eliminate the lottery, but would streamline the process for awarding visas to technology workers. Democrats instead want to give the country away by passing the Dream Act, which basically eliminates the border with Mexico because it provides citizenship to illegal immigrants.
    you are ALL immigrants, unless you are native American!
  4. Standard member sasquatch672
    Don't Like It Leave
    04 Dec '12 03:43
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    you are ALL immigrants, unless you are native American!
    There are legal immigrants and illegal immigrants.
  5. 04 Dec '12 18:24
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    you are ALL immigrants, unless you are native American!
    I think the native Americans immigrated also via the Bearing Straight.

    I don't know of any country in the world in 2012 that does not control immigration. Some are more liberal than the US, some are less so. But interestingly people have so much more fun criticizing the US about it.
  6. 04 Dec '12 18:52 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by techsouth
    I don't know of any country in the world in 2012 that does not control immigration. Some are more liberal than the US, some are less so. But interestingly people have so much more fun criticizing the US about it.
    Could that be because we admire the nobility of the founding ideals of the US, and the belief that people can become American regardless of birthplace, race or creed?
  7. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    04 Dec '12 19:01
    Originally posted by sasquatch672
    http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/11/30/166239067/an-overture-to-latinos-gop-controlled-house-passes-immigration-bill

    The Bill would eliminate the lottery, but would streamline the process for awarding visas to technology workers. Democrats instead want to give the country away by passing the Dream Act, which basically eliminates the border with Mexico because it provides citizenship to illegal immigrants.
    Less Africans, more technocrats. Immigration reform that right wingers can get behind.
  8. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    04 Dec '12 19:05
    Originally posted by techsouth
    I think the native Americans immigrated also via the Bearing Straight.

    I don't know of any country in the world in 2012 that does not control immigration. Some are more liberal than the US, some are less so. But interestingly people have so much more fun criticizing the US about it.
    But nobody was here when the American Indians got here.
  9. 04 Dec '12 19:31
    This country has an over-abundance of cheap, unskilled labor thanks to lax immigration. What we need are highly skilled laborers, not more minimum-wage or lower agricultural workers. The agricultural industry is subsidized enough. Minimum wage jobs are not going to help this economy, and guaranteed unless South America and Central America miraculously improve their education systems by leaps and bounds, we aren't going to get any of that from south of the border. We should be trying to stem the flow of unskilled labor from Mexico and Central America, and increase the flow of skilled workers from Europe and Asia.

    As to the fundamental belief that everyone can become a US citizen, one of the most important aspects of Society is the ability to follow it's laws. If you can't even follow our laws regarding entry to this society, what incentive do we have to believe you'll be any better once you're here?
  10. 04 Dec '12 19:47
    Originally posted by sasquatch672
    There are legal immigrants and illegal immigrants.
    So you are not one of the many Republican right-wingers who make a huge distinction between "illegal immigrant" vs. "illegal alien", who asserts that "illegal immigrant" is not a correct phrase because allegedly by definition an immigrant is legal, and that if here illegally one is an illegal alien. I know not a big issue but it is nonsense how the right-wingers are so insistent on that and how important it is to them that an illegal immigrant not be called an illegal immigrant but instead be called an illegal alien.

    It goes to show how right-wingers focus on insignficant points and also use meaningless slogans in the discussion of immigration reform. The rabid Republican rank-and-file in this issue do more damage to progress on immigration reform than anyone, and can be absolutely racist and idiotic.
  11. 04 Dec '12 20:13
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    But nobody was here when the American Indians got here.
    Did they all come over at once?

    Didn't a few have to come before others? And aren't the late coming American Indians encroaching on someone else's pair of continents?
  12. 04 Dec '12 20:15
    Originally posted by moon1969
    So you are not one of the many Republican right-wingers who make a huge distinction between "illegal immigrant" vs. "illegal alien", who asserts that "illegal immigrant" is not a correct phrase because allegedly by definition an immigrant is legal, and that if here illegally one is an illegal alien. I know not a big issue but it is nonsense how the right- ...[text shortened]... e to progress on immigration reform than anyone, and can be absolutely racist and idiotic.
    If right-wingers so ubiquitously insist on the term "illegal alien", why am I just now hearing about it, from a presumed liberal no less?
  13. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    04 Dec '12 20:21 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by techsouth
    Did they all come over at once?

    Didn't a few have to come before others? And aren't the late coming American Indians encroaching on someone else's pair of continents?
    The Paleoamericans e.g. Mexicans and Incas were first. They passed through North America and settled from Mexico to the south. Later groups like the Apache moved into North America after the Paleoamericans left. There was some conflict in the Arizona region which is why the Mexicans moved south but if you ask a typical Mexican ethnic fanatic and a typical Apache ethnic fanatic if they have problems with each other they will say no. They recognize that the Paleoamericans do not claim most of North America.

    In contrast Tlaxcala are much more likely to hate Mexicans because when the Mexicans went south they took over and demanded tribute.

    wikipedia.org/wiki/Settlement_of_the_Americas
    http://athousandyoung.blogspot.com/2010/12/history-and-prehistory-of-everything.html?m=1
  14. 04 Dec '12 20:43 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    The Paleoamericans e.g. Mexicans and Incas were first. They passed through North America and settled from Mexico to the south. Later groups like the Apache moved into North America after the Paleoamericans left. There was some conflict in the Arizona region which is why the Mexicans moved south but if you ask a typical Mexican ethnic fanatic and a typ ...[text shortened]... ca.

    http://athousandyoung.blogspot.com/2010/12/history-and-prehistory-of-everything.html?m=1
    Did they groups exist as a cohesive unit at the time they came over. In other words, were the Apaches considered Apaches when they crossed the Bearing Straight? Or did their group identities form after they came here? If they weren't a cohesive group, the according to your apparent standard, the first Apache that arrived both had the right then, and retains the right in 2012, to ask any descendents of the second to arrive Apache to leave now.

    As for me, both my parents were born in America, and both their sets of parents, and all four of their sets of parents (some of them even with Cherokee blood). As far as I'm considered, I'm an American as are the "Native Americans".

    But regardless of ideology, one has to recognized the absurdity of opening the borders of the US to anyone in 2012. For example, a decade or so ago, the US had a policy that any Cuban refugee that reached US waters would be allowed to move here. Castro countered by loading up patients from Cuba's insane asylums onto rafts and sending them over. The US compromised by requiring refugees to reach land and Castro stopped sending mental patients over.

    Question one: what does one suggest should happen to a person of European descent that has 5 or 6 generations of forefathers that lived in the US?

    Question two: what do you think would happen if the US said (in 2012, not 1712), that anyone who arrives here can live here, work here, and get free Obamacare here?

    Question three (4 & 5): if you insist that the US should let anyone who comes here live and work here, what about all the other countries? And why not disparage them as much as the US? And can you name any country that does this in 2012?
  15. 04 Dec '12 20:44
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    But nobody was here when the American Indians got here.
    They came in waves over about 300 centuries, so only the first arrivals should be counted as having come to unoccupied lands.