Immigration crackdown begins with scores Arrested.....

IF we accept the premise that unalienable Rights come from God, then the short answer is yes. People have a Right to Liberty. OTOH, there is no law out there that says you have to extend the privileges of citizenship to people that choose to come here. No law says you have to give the foreigner preferential treatment - and foreigners get special treatment thanks to ... to ... to... the right wing conservatives and Tea Party types. Yes, I'm serious.

In order to fool themselves, the right is all about the background check, National ID, etc. But, we have so many stupid laws on the books that a high percentage of Americans have marks against their record and cannot compete against foreigners that do not have things in their background... because a lot of petty crap isn't a crime in other countries.

LilMike, I don't understand what you want nor what your objectives are. But, early in this nation's history only whites could hold elective office; only white landowners could vote; inter-racial marriage was outlawed. Still, we did not tell foreigners that they could not come here and take a job that was willingly offered. So, I'm at a loss to understand you.

If the government can put a restriction on Liberty, then ALL of your unalienable Rights are subject to the same, identical scrutiny and the same exact latitude within the parameters of the law. If you can tell an employer who they can and cannot hire and you can limit the Liberty of another person, then plain and simple, you have put the government in charge of the Rights granting business. And government can take anything back that they gave you.

You want to make me the bad guy for delivering the truth, but with the ball in your court, tell me how you can defend gun rights if all they come down to are spurious laws that don't take into account that this is a Republic and unalienable Rights trump statutes that try to take rights away. Quit disagreeing with me and show me how we win with this inconsistent approach to the Constitution.

 

why would they, they were told by the courts they could not be here, the Dems are just following the courts rulings... what would republicans do differently?

 

I'm not trying to make you out to be a bad guy, I just think your interpretation of the Declaration, the Constitution, and Natural Law are wrong. Nothing there says we can't control our borders, and there are a lot of good reasons to do just that. You speak of gun rights, but there is hardly anywhere else in the world where that is respected other than the US. Importing hundreds of millions here for whom gun rights, or any other type of rights is an alien concept, doesn't seem like a sound strategy to keep those rights.

What kind of liberty do you think there will be in a country that adds hundred of millions of uneducated people who can't speak the language? None because there will no longer be a national consensus as to what liberty is. You speak of liberty in a Western Enlightenment way. On this planet that is a tiny boutique view that isn't even shared by most of the people in the Western World, let alone world wide. For most of the world, freedom means freedom for their ethnic/religious group to impose their way of life on others. That's what we'll get here if you import it.

Long term, we'll probably get that anyway, but what's the rush?

 

That's if they showed up for their court date, Right?

 

don't show up for a court date and a warrant for your arrest is also issue, that is the way it works

 

I thought they had reported on, how many don't even show up for court? There was some statistics on that, Right?

 

In theory yes, in practice... NO.

 

We can police the border and we can regulate immigration. Neither approach will produce the results you seem to want. So, in my mind, how is it we protect Liberty, our own rights AND still resolve the issues around immigration?

How about additional tax incentives for employers that hire an all American workforce (or at least 85 percent Americans), bring jobs back to the U.S. and / or keep more than 80 percent of their business within U.S. borders?

Why don't we dismantle the U.S. Dept. of Education and make education a state issue? Could we then not declare that a public education is NOT a right, but a benefit of citizenship?

We can limit state welfare to citizens. How come we don't work to make all welfare and government assistance a state issue where we can control who qualifies and who does not?

My position is that if you take the incentives for foreigners to come here, they won't.

Alternatively, the focus has always been on the southern border. Spending trillions there will not stop those who come in from Muslim countries via some "proper" avenue, all the while intending to do harm to our country. How come we aren't changing our focus to deny entry to those from countries, religions, etc. that have declared war on America?

 

You've made an impassioned plea in this thread that natural rights mean that everyone has a right to live here, so that pretty much invalidates anything you regard as a remedy. We are not going to limit welfare to citizens. We're not going to make government assistance a state issue, and the incentives to come to America....man, the world is a craphole. Most of the world has poverty and safety issues worse than Mexico.

There is a lot of ruin in a country, and this country will by an apocalyptic dystopia before it's so bad that it won't be a magnet for millions of teeming poor. I would rather not help it become an apocalyptic dystopia by throwing open the borders because someone on the internet thought that was an unalienable right.

 

but when they do not show up, a warrant is issued, if they are ever stopped by the cops in the future they would be arrested on an outstanding warrant

.

 

You have to ask yourself a realistic question here. If the founding fathers shared the same sentiment as you, how come you suppose they didn't propose to militarize the border and kill anyone that tried to enter?

Sure, you can hire federal mercenaries and put up a wall along the southern border. But, what happens when the United States Supreme Court decides that separating families is cruel and unusual punishment? What is your battle strategy if the United States Supreme Court ends this belief that unless one's parents are born here they cannot be a citizen (the so - called anchor baby argument?) What is your battle plan if you lose?

If you're considering rebellion beyond that, remember it will be YOUR name on the legislation that created those federal mercenaries that will now have their sights pointed at you. You're backing a bad strategy. What you're expecting is to close a barn door after the cows have left the barn. Study the people on the United States Supreme Court. They will not deport millions of people along with those born in this country.

Adding insult to injury, Benjamin Franklin once mused that a person willing to trade off Liberty for the promise of temporary Safety deserved neither Liberty nor Safety. You see the thing is once you make the trade, you end up with neither.

 

That Franklin quote should at least relate to the issue somewhat.

As for the rest of your comment...you've gone of the rails as far as a rational discussion goes. I do think that a great number of people think like you, that borders are meaningless and everyone is welcome. We're seeing that play out in Europe and Europe will provide a canary in the coal mine warning as to what will happen to us. You may be right that the courts invalidate thousands of laws regarding immigration and naturalization and throw open the doors, but it hasn't happened yet, and until the SC actually pulls the trigger on the gun pointed at the political entity known as the United States, I'll try to oppose national suicide.

 

What I know is that since the first colonists entered the United States, the border has always been open. That's not to say it hasn't been protected; it's simply been relatively open.

Today, the government controls way too much land. Has the Bundy fiasco not convinced you of the dangers of the government controlling property? There has to be a better way. Personally, I've had no problem with civilians defending their private property along the border. I'd even be supportive of those who had to shoot trespassers when the property is posted.

We simply didn't have all these problems until we allowed the liberals to enact laws that force employers to hire on a quota basis and not use discrimination. Americans were convinced that we were supposed be some kind of melting pot where we will all sit around the campfire, hold hands and sing Kum Bay Ya while we are so accepting of each other. Horsepuckey!

We got into this mess on the installment plan with a steady growth in the government that created the problem. The best path is to reverse the course and shrink the government as we reclaim our nation.

 

Come back and talk to us when they are deported millions of them.

 

I'll tell you what I won't do. I will not allow the xenophobes to hog tie us so that resistance is impossible just to enact unconstitutional laws that serve no purpose. IF the anti - immigrant side prevails, I truly hope that those who made the loudest noise are the first ones the federal mercenaries pick off first. My Liberty is not for sale - especially not for some transient cause that cannot stand up to critical scrutiny.

Anybody that really thinks the government is going to uncitizen millions of kids born in the United States whose parents didn't have a piece of paper are as ignorant as the few who believe Ted Cruz will be denied the ability to be president.