Immigration is Destroying America.

[Unkotare]

The US Supreme Court is an infinitely more authoritative source in interpreting the US Constitution than some doddering old mental case on the internet. Anyone born in the US IS a US citizen.

 

[Unkotare]

Millions of jobs are going unfilled.

Three million open jobs in U.S., but who's qualified? - CBS News

Skills Shortage Means Many Jobs Go Unfilled - WSJ

 

[Unkotare]

And it should be noted once more that LEGAL immigrants are assimilating to American culture, language, and life today just as those who came before them did.

 

[LiberalMedia]

As the law stands now, absent a Constitutional Amendment, anyone born here in the US is a US citizen despite any intentionally insulting or dismissive monikers some angry keyboardistas might try to hang on them.

This is a FALSE interpretation of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. NO, anyone born here in the US should NOT be a US citizen. The amendment does not apply to children born here, of foreigners. The idea that these children are automatically American citizens is simply wrong, and is in contradiction to the words of the author of the 14th Amendment, Sen. Jacob Howard.

...

"The 14th amendment will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of person." (Jacob Howard, May 30, 1866)

So some angry old white manpig WANTS the law to say, "I hate all non-whites and non-Americans, and none of them are citizens ever," but what he ACTUALLY WROTE was, "Everyone born in the U.S. is a U.S. citizen. Everyone born abroad to an American parent is an American citizen." Whose fault is it that the law you attribute to him doesn't reflect in any way what you say his intent in writing it was? His own. And only his own. Grow a spine and get some accountability, conservatard.

Therefore, the false interpretations of the 14th amendment allowing birthright citizenship, including the 1898 SCOTUS decision in US vs Wong Kim Ark are all unconstitutional, and should have been corrected long ago, and still are in fact, illegal.

This claim is such complete bullshit. There is no such thing as a "false" interpretation of ANYTHING. An interpretation is an opinion, and an opinion cannot be wrong, no matter how much you disagree with it or how ungrounded in truth it is. Even if, IF, the Supreme Court's long-standing interpretation of the 14th Amendment were somehow not reflective of the actual text of the amendment from a common sense standpoint, it is literally impossible for the SC's interpretation to be held as unconstitutional and/or illegal, given that the Constitution establishes the Supreme Court as the supreme authority on controversies relating to the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.

 

[GreenBean]

The US Supreme Court is an infinitely more authoritative source in interpreting the US Constitution than some doddering old mental case on the internet. Anyone born in the US IS a US citizen.

So then you agree Obama is not a US Citizen ?

 

[Unkotare]

The US Supreme Court is an infinitely more authoritative source in interpreting the US Constitution than some doddering old mental case on the internet. Anyone born in the US IS a US citizen.

So then you agree Obama is not a US Citizen ?

You need to take that question to the Conspiracy Forum. I'm sure a lot of subjects there are waiting to discuss it.

 

[GreenBean]

As the law stands now, absent a Constitutional Amendment, anyone born here in the US is a US citizen despite any intentionally insulting or dismissive monikers some angry keyboardistas might try to hang on them.

This is a FALSE interpretation of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. NO, anyone born here in the US should NOT be a US citizen. The amendment does not apply to children born here, of foreigners. The idea that these children are automatically American citizens is simply wrong, and is in contradiction to the words of the author of the 14th Amendment, Sen. Jacob Howard.

...

"The 14th amendment will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of person." (Jacob Howard, May 30, 1866)

So some angry old white manpig WANTS the law to say, "I hate all non-whites and non-Americans, and none of them are citizens ever," but what he ACTUALLY WROTE was, "Everyone born in the U.S. is a U.S. citizen. Everyone born abroad to an American parent is an American citizen." Whose fault is it that the law you attribute to him doesn't reflect in any way what you say his intent in writing it was? His own. And only his own. Grow a spine and get some accountability, conservatard.

Therefore, the false interpretations of the 14th amendment allowing birthright citizenship, including the 1898 SCOTUS decision in US vs Wong Kim Ark are all unconstitutional, and should have been corrected long ago, and still are in fact, illegal.

This claim is such complete bullshit. There is no such thing as a "false" interpretation of ANYTHING. An interpretation is an opinion, and an opinion cannot be wrong, no matter how much you disagree with it or how ungrounded in truth it is. Even if, IF, the Supreme Court's long-standing interpretation of the 14th Amendment were somehow not reflective of the actual text of the amendment from a common sense standpoint, it is literally impossible for the SC's interpretation to be held as unconstitutional and/or illegal, given that the Constitution establishes the Supreme Court as the supreme authority on controversies relating to the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.

So I see we have some fresh meat - and a Femi-Nazi at that joining the fray - welcome aboard "Sweety"

it is literally impossible for the SC's interpretation to be held as unconstitutional and/or illegal, given that the Constitution establishes the Supreme Court as the supreme authority on controversies relating to the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution

So are you saying the Supreme Court never reverses itself - or never contradicts rulings /opinions of prior Supreme Courts ? That being the case than the Dred Scott case still holds true and the KKK and Democratic Party slave holders are still entitled to the fruits of the Labor of the last several generations of African Americans ? Hmmm interesting

 

[GreenBean]

The US Supreme Court is an infinitely more authoritative source in interpreting the US Constitution than some doddering old mental case on the internet. Anyone born in the US IS a US citizen.

So then you agree Obama is not a US Citizen ?

You need to take that question to the Conspiracy Forum. I'm sure a lot of subjects there are waiting to discuss it.

So then you agree Obama is part of a conspiracy- the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American People- and the current immigration debacle is simply an extension of said Fraud ? Good Point

 

[LiberalMedia]

Millions of jobs are going unfilled.

Skills Shortage Means Many Jobs Go Unfilled - WSJ

Look at this bullshit.

Business owner Jerry Schill receives a phone call almost daily from condo or commercial businesses looking to hire his North Ridgeville, Ohio, landscaping company, but he has to turn nearly all of them away.

With just 106 employees, he has passed on potential clients with multiple locations and other big projects. The problem: He needs five managers to oversee work crews, quality control and safety.

He has advertised the managerial positions, which pay up to $75,000 a year and include retirement benefits, for Schill Grounds Management Inc. since October. So far, he hasn't found anyone with both managerial and landscaping experience. If these jobs weren't still vacant, "we could easily add 20% more business," he says.

There are two problems with this. The first, this jackass is hiring for only for managers. What the fuck. This is why costs are so fucking high--idiots like him ARE LITERALLY REFUSING TO LET THEIR WORKERS WORK without some moron making $75,000 standing around and pointing fingers at the job site.

The second problem: The whiny bitch in this example is setting his standards way too high, and crying about not being able to find someone to meet his ridiculous demands. He wants an overpaid babysitter but doesn't take skill into account at all, only the magical word experience. I am forced to wonder how many well-educated applicants he's turned away because they didn't have enough experience. Employers forget that "experience" is merely code for "I avoided getting fired for X number of months," and does not reflect ability in the least.

So, Unkotare, your argument about unfilled jobs hinges upon douchebags like this corporate Schill who REFUSE to hire people who don't have years worth of extremely specific experience. They have dug, and continue to dig, their own grave.

In the latest WSJ/Vistage survey, 35% of 270 services businesses said they couldn't identify qualified candidates, versus 12% of the 135 manufacturing firms, and 8% of 85 wholesale trade businesses.

There's that reference again, "qualified candidates," because non-existent-omniscient-being forbid these capitalist pigs actually hire someone with real skills and not just the ability to claim they didn't get fired from their last job for however many months in a row.

All of the above are EXACTLY why we need to abolish markets and establish a global economic system of pure communism. Capitalism clearly isn't working because capitalists literally won't let it. Communists like myself have no problem letting other people succeed.

 

[LiberalMedia]

This is a FALSE interpretation of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. NO, anyone born here in the US should NOT be a US citizen. The amendment does not apply to children born here, of foreigners. The idea that these children are automatically American citizens is simply wrong, and is in contradiction to the words of the author of the 14th Amendment, Sen. Jacob Howard.

...

"The 14th amendment will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of person." (Jacob Howard, May 30, 1866)

So some angry old white manpig WANTS the law to say, "I hate all non-whites and non-Americans, and none of them are citizens ever," but what he ACTUALLY WROTE was, "Everyone born in the U.S. is a U.S. citizen. Everyone born abroad to an American parent is an American citizen." Whose fault is it that the law you attribute to him doesn't reflect in any way what you say his intent in writing it was? His own. And only his own. Grow a spine and get some accountability, conservatard.



This claim is such complete bullshit. There is no such thing as a "false" interpretation of ANYTHING. An interpretation is an opinion, and an opinion cannot be wrong, no matter how much you disagree with it or how ungrounded in truth it is. Even if, IF, the Supreme Court's long-standing interpretation of the 14th Amendment were somehow not reflective of the actual text of the amendment from a common sense standpoint, it is literally impossible for the SC's interpretation to be held as unconstitutional and/or illegal, given that the Constitution establishes the Supreme Court as the supreme authority on controversies relating to the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.

So I see we have some fresh meat - and a Femi-Nazi at that joining the fray - welcome aboard "Sweety"

Right off the bat you establish yourself as a sexist pig. You don't even attempt to address any of my completely valid points, and instead launch right into degredation (referring to a strong, independent womyn as "meat"), insults ("Femi-Nazi"), and sexual harassment ("Sweety").

it is literally impossible for the SC's interpretation to be held as unconstitutional and/or illegal, given that the Constitution establishes the Supreme Court as the supreme authority on controversies relating to the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution

So are you saying the Supreme Court never reverses itself - or never contradicts rulings /opinions of prior Supreme Courts ?

Nope.

 

[Contumacious]

The welfare/warfare state and not immigration is destroying the USA.

 

[protectionist]

the welfare/warfare state and not immigration is destroying the usa.

bullshit.

 

[Contumacious]

the welfare/warfare state and not immigration is destroying the usa.

bullshit.

Soooooooooo , we have too many people........hummmmmmmmmmmmm..........can you then help alleviate the problem by leaving .


Thanks.

.

 

[GreenBean]

So some angry old white manpig WANTS the law to say, "I hate all non-whites and non-Americans, and none of them are citizens ever," but what he ACTUALLY WROTE was, "Everyone born in the U.S. is a U.S. citizen. Everyone born abroad to an American parent is an American citizen." Whose fault is it that the law you attribute to him doesn't reflect in any way what you say his intent in writing it was? His own. And only his own. Grow a spine and get some accountability, conservatard.



This claim is such complete bullshit. There is no such thing as a "false" interpretation of ANYTHING. An interpretation is an opinion, and an opinion cannot be wrong, no matter how much you disagree with it or how ungrounded in truth it is. Even if, IF, the Supreme Court's long-standing interpretation of the 14th Amendment were somehow not reflective of the actual text of the amendment from a common sense standpoint, it is literally impossible for the SC's interpretation to be held as unconstitutional and/or illegal, given that the Constitution establishes the Supreme Court as the supreme authority on controversies relating to the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.

So I see we have some fresh meat - and a Femi-Nazi at that joining the fray - welcome aboard "Sweety"

Right off the bat you establish yourself as a sexist pig. You don't even attempt to address any of my completely valid points, and instead launch right into degredation (referring to a strong, independent womyn as "meat"), insults ("Femi-Nazi"), and sexual harassment ("Sweety").

it is literally impossible for the SC's interpretation to be held as unconstitutional and/or illegal, given that the Constitution establishes the Supreme Court as the supreme authority on controversies relating to the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution

So are you saying the Supreme Court never reverses itself - or never contradicts rulings /opinions of prior Supreme Courts ?

Nope.

Oh cum on now cutey - don't be so harsh - you established yourself as a Femi-nazi Pig and a Racist with your Sexist - Racist Rant .

So some angry old white manpig WANTS the law to say

You insulted
1. Men
2. White People
3. Mature People
4. Conservative People {Conservatard}

And you are also an insult to my Intelligence. But you feel that's perfectly Okay- because you're a self Righteous Feminist - Pig . Wakeup Sweety -the rest of the World certainly is .

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

The welfare/warfare state and not immigration is destroying the USA.

Immigration is destroying our public services(aka the welfare state) among other things, like flooding our labor markets(taking jobs from Americans and driving wages down for the rest).

If it were up to insane and autistic libertarians like yourself that advocate open borders and privatization, there would be no social safety net or public services,and we would be brought down to the wages and living standards present in the third world countries these immigrants come from.

All you guys care about is the almighty dollar before anything else.

 

[protectionist]

As the law stands now, absent a Constitutional Amendment, anyone born here in the US is a US citizen despite any intentionally insulting or dismissive monikers some angry keyboardistas might try to hang on them.

This is a FALSE interpretation of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. NO, anyone born here in the US should NOT be a US citizen. The amendment does not apply to children born here, of foreigners. The idea that these children are automatically American citizens is simply wrong, and is in contradiction to the words of the author of the 14th Amendment, Sen. Jacob Howard.

...

"The 14th amendment will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of person." (Jacob Howard, May 30, 1866)

So some angry old white manpig WANTS the law to say, "I hate all non-whites and non-Americans, and none of them are citizens ever," but what he ACTUALLY WROTE was, "Everyone born in the U.S. is a U.S. citizen. Everyone born abroad to an American parent is an American citizen." Whose fault is it that the law you attribute to him doesn't reflect in any way what you say his intent in writing it was? His own. And only his own. Grow a spine and get some accountability, conservatard.

Therefore, the false interpretations of the 14th amendment allowing birthright citizenship, including the 1898 SCOTUS decision in US vs Wong Kim Ark are all unconstitutional, and should have been corrected long ago, and still are in fact, illegal.

This claim is such complete bullshit. There is no such thing as a "false" interpretation of ANYTHING. An interpretation is an opinion, and an opinion cannot be wrong, no matter how much you disagree with it or how ungrounded in truth it is. Even if, IF, the Supreme Court's long-standing interpretation of the 14th Amendment were somehow not reflective of the actual text of the amendment from a common sense standpoint, it is literally impossible for the SC's interpretation to be held as unconstitutional and/or illegal, given that the Constitution establishes the Supreme Court as the supreme authority on controversies relating to the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.

1. You display sexism.

2. You display ageism.

3. You display racism.

4. Nice try at rewriting history. What Howard ACTUALLY WROTE was exactly what I said he wrote (FACT not opinion) >> "The 14th amendment will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of person." (Jacob Howard, May 30, 1866)

5. Grow a spine and get some accountability, libtard.

6. Your last paragraph is too imbecile to warrant response. An opinion cannot be wrong ? HA HA HA. You might want to go back and re-think that one. Everyone in this thread is laughing right now. I mean really. Anyone ever tell you you talk too much ?

7. The fault that the law that history attributes to him has, instead of going HIS way, has gone the way of birthright citizenship for kids of foreigners, is the fault of everyone who didn't want it to be that way, including immigrants, kids born here of immigrants, Supreme court justices, and people like you who want things to be your way, regardless of the intentions of the founding fathers, like Sen. Jacob Howard.

 

[GreenBean]

The welfare/warfare state and not immigration is destroying the USA.

They're basically two arms of the same Monster - it all evolves a socio-fascist strategy known as Cloward-Piven

The Cloward Piven strategy was outlined in 1966 by political activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. It called for deliberately forcing the U.S. public welfare system into over-drive in order to precipitate a economic collapse that would finalize in replacing the welfare system with a socialist system devoid of a work ethic, an income guaranteed and thus an end to poverty, basically a system where gnomes, fairies and elves do all the Labor and Santa Claus distributes the wealth regardless of whether you've been good or bad. The strategy was outlined in a May 1966 article in The Nation entitled "The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty".

Cloward and Pliven pointed out that the number of Americans subsisting on social services probably represented less than half the number who were actually eligible for full benefits. They proposed a "massive drive to recruit the poor onto the welfare rolls." Cloward and Piven presented calculations that persuading even a fraction of potential welfare recipients to demand what they viewed as entitlements would bankrupt the system. The result, theoretically would be "a profound financial and political crisis" - basically an initiating domino that would eventually lead to the economic collapse of the USA and leave Humanity ripe for the ensuing onslaught of Marxism or other illogical derivatives of it. Rudolph Giuliani, while serving as NY City Mayor attempted to expose Cloward-Pliven in the late 1990s. As part of his drive for welfare reform he accused the militant scholars by name and cited their 1966 manifesto as evidence that they had engaged in deliberate economic sabotage. Cloward- Pliven Strategy

Obama is no fool. He is not incompetent. To the contrary, he is brilliant. He knows exactly what he's doing. He is purposely overwhelming the U.S. economy to create systemic failure, economic crisis and social chaos -- thereby destroying capitalism and our country from within - Obama's agenda: Overwhelm the system

 

[protectionist]

the welfare/warfare state and not immigration is destroying the usa.

bullshit.

Soooooooooo , we have too many people........hummmmmmmmmmmmm..........can you then help alleviate the problem by leaving .

I can. But there's no reason why I should. Since I was born here, Have lived here all my life. Worked and paid taxes here for 50 years and served in the Us military for 5 years.
To the contrary, new arriving immigrants have done none of these things. They have no right to be here. Or should I say YOU ? (instead of they)

 

[Contumacious]

The welfare/warfare state and not immigration is destroying the USA.

Immigration is destroying our public services(aka the welfare state) among other things, like flooding our labor markets(taking jobs from Americans and driving wages down for the rest).

If it were up to insane and autistic libertarians like yourself that advocate open borders and privatization, there would be no social safety net or public services,and we would be brought down to the wages and living standards present in the third world countries these immigrants come from.

All you guys care about is the almighty dollar before anything else.

Dude, you should not have to pay because immigrants are here.

But that doesn't mean that you should be free of a competing labor force.

.

 

[Contumacious]

The welfare/warfare state and not immigration is destroying the USA.

They're basically two arms of the same Monster - it all evolves a socio-fascist strategy known as Cloward-Piven

With all due respect to Messrs Cloward and Piven I disagree. The problem is demagogue politicians who are willing to set aside principles in favor of electability.

.