74% of births in Parkland public hospital in Dallas Tx are by ILLEGAL moms

[nick1985]

Come on now, you know the rules, if disagree with the loony left you're a xenophobic, racist, homophobe, if you disagree with the neocon right you're an unAmerican, commie pinko ...I don't want to have to remind you again so post a sticky note some ...mk

dont forget the bigot word. Lefties love to call people a bigot

 

[BoomerD]

It was never a big deal like it is now where have you lived the last 20 years? What about Proposition 187 “Save Our State initiative” that passed in CA in 1994.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_187_(1994)

I voted for Prop 187...but wasn't surprised that it was thrown out. It's one of the few GOOD things that Pete Wilson supported.

 

[nobodyknows]

I suppose the answer might be that I consider the Mexican to be an American Indian and part of the Apache group of Indians. IF the Apache can roam about his former homeland then why not all the Apache... both in Mexico and the US... I just can't see this border thing as it applies to the Indian. I presume there may be some reason that the European is educated and you assess the Indian as being uneducated and that may be true... but why?

The policy ought to be subordinated to our laws among which a treaty is part of... I'm not really sure if there is a clear line of who is the heir to the rights but there should be one...

Posession is 9/10ths of the law. You won't give up your property yet you expect others to?? We don't know the complete history of the land because we haven't been around that long, but something tells me that with all the different Indian tribes around that they were constantly fighting and taking each others territory. Who lived there before the Apache and what happened to them?

As I've stated we have people standing in line to come to this country who are educated. How they got educated is immaterial, the are educated and they want to come here but are waiting in line to do so. We have doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc waiting to come to this country and yet you favor letting Mexicans come into our country in umlimited numbers because some of them might have some Apache blood in them?

Pesonally I think we need to let in the people who can do this country the most good first. They are the ones who cna provide the jobs, ideas, and support to create decent paying jobs for everyone. Then when weget out of this recession and create a labor shortage we can look at letting more unskilled labor in.

 

[nobodyknows]

It was never a big deal like it is now where have you lived the last 20 years? What about Proposition 187 “Save Our State initiative” that passed in CA in 1994.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_187_(1994)

Don't forget about Operation beautiful ray of sunshine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wetback

Operation beautiful ray of sunshine was a 1954 operation by the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) to remove about one million illegal immigrants from the southwestern United States, focusing on Mexican nationals[1].
.
.


Operation beautiful ray of sunshine in action
The effort began in California and Arizona, and coordinated 1075 Border Patrol agents, along with state and local police agencies, to mount an aggressive crackdown. Tactics employed included going as far as systematic police sweeps of Mexican-American neighborhoods, and random stops and ID checks of "Mexican-looking" people in a region with many Native Americans and native Hispanics. In some cases, illegal immigrants were deported along with their American-born minor dependent children. Some 750 agents targeted agricultural areas with a goal of 1,000 apprehensions per day. By the end of July, over 50,000 immigrants were caught in the two states. An estimated 488,000 illegal immigrants are claimed to have left voluntarily, for fear of being apprehended. By September, 80,000 had been taken into custody in Texas, and the INS estimated that 500,000 to 700,000 had left Texas of their own accord. To discourage illicit re-entry, buses and trains took many deportees deep within Mexican territory prior to releasing them. Tens of thousands more were deported by two chartered ships, the Emancipation and the Mercurio. The ships ferried them from Port Isabel, Texas, to Veracruz, Mexico, more than 500 miles (800 kilometers) to the south. Some were taken as far as 1,000 miles. Deportation by sea was ended after seven deportees jumped overboard from the Mercurio and drowned, provoking a mutiny that led to a public outcry in Mexico.[3]

 

[LunarRay]

As I've stated we have people standing in line to come to this country who are educated. How they got educated is immaterial, the are educated and they want to come here but are waiting in line to do so. We have doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc waiting to come to this country and yet you favor letting Mexicans come into our country in umlimited numbers because some of them might have some Apache blood in them?

QUOTE]


Now why on earth would I want educated people coming to my country taking jobs from the folks who are citizens and out of work but equally educated as them there foreigners... Nope! Don't let a one of them in... Let them go to Mexico... I hear tell there is a need for educated people there... Seems hardly a soul from down south there got any education at all.

I favor living up to the Treaties we enter into... So... does it matter that some European (Spanish) interbred with the Apache? The land owned back then should be owned today and by the person and his heirs... Possession is NOT 99 percent of anything... That only occurs with the Bully notion... and that is not what we believe in as a law abiding country, now is it?

You can disagree and that is fine by me... and ain't that the beauty of it all... Don't ya just love freedom?

 

[nobodyknows]

Now why on earth would I want educated people coming to my country taking jobs from the folks who are citizens and out of work but equally educated as them there foreigners... Nope! Don't let a one of them in... Let them go to Mexico... I hear tell there is a need for educated people there... Seems hardly a soul from down south there got any education at all.

I favor living up to the Treaties we enter into... So... does it matter that some European (Spanish) interbred with the Apache? The land owned back then should be owned today and by the person and his heirs... Possession is NOT 99 percent of anything... That only occurs with the Bully notion... and that is not what we believe in as a law abiding country, now is it?

You can disagree and that is fine by me... and ain't that the beauty of it all... Don't ya just love freedom?

Umm, the people want to come to the USA, not Mexico so I fail to see whatever point it is you think you are making??.

As far aw living up to treaties, do you seriously think the courts are going to kick US citizens out of their houses? I'm from South Dakota, home of the Black Hills, which were awarded to the Lakota Sioux Indians in the 1868 Treaty of Fort Laramie. Back in 1980 the Sioux took their case before the SCOTUS and won... well they won $106 million but refused to settle for it, so that money sits in an interest bearing account but they won't accept it, they want the land back.

The funny part is the Sioux came into South Dakota from Minnesota sometime in the eighteenth century. They drove off and/or killed off the Arikara, Crow, etc. who were liviing here at that time. Do you suppose they should give the land back to them?

Seriously, that's just life and the way things worked back then. If you lost you were either killed, drove off, or turned into a slave.

I'm willing to do my part to make things right, what i want to know is exactly what is it you are willing to give up?

 

[piasabird]

Yeah lets give all the land back to the Toltecs that the Mayans took from them. They were nothing but marauding invaders.

Better learn some history before you talk about native american affairs. For thousands of years different indian tribes and groups have been at war for their territory. There have been massive American Native Migrations in the past. You probably do not know this.

 

[LunarRay]

Umm, the people want to come to the USA, not Mexico so I fail to see whatever point it is you think you are making??.

Ahh... The point is we don't have jobs for our own educated folks so why do we need more educated folks to make the task of getting a job harder? And, if there is no work for these European folks here what do they hope to gain by coming here... but, I guess that is their want in life.. IF these educated wanna be immigrants wish to enjoy their productivity then they should go where jobs exist for them...

As far aw living up to treaties, do you seriously think the courts are going to kick US citizens out of their houses? I'm from South Dakota, home of the Black Hills, which were awarded to the Lakota Sioux Indians in the 1868 Treaty of Fort Laramie. Back in 1980 the Sioux took their case before the SCOTUS and won... well they won $106 million but refused to settle for it, so that money sits in an interest bearing account but they won't accept it, they want the land back.

The roll of the courts is to provide remedy where it is due. Remedy can take the form of returning the situation back to its status quo ante or failing that - if that is not practical - to use money or some other remedy... that is often the case when there is a compelling reason to not provide a more direct remedy.
It is only reasonable when you have a treaty that provided for continued ownership of real property that has not been signed over in some manner for that title to remain with the holder... or the holder through a holder in due course.. Absent some finding that Immanent Domain factors enter in to it all the land ought to belong to who it ought to belong under law.

The funny part is the Sioux came into South Dakota from Minnesota sometime in the eighteenth century. They drove off and/or killed off the Arikara, Crow, etc. who were living here at that time. Do you suppose they should give the land back to them?

Is there a treaty between the Crow and Sioux regarding their land? It seems there exists treaties between the Indian and the US Government.
The indigenous people are Native American Indians... From Canada down to where ever they are... That they fight and usurp among themselves is their issue. The European contingent starting with probably James Smith came to this land and from that a systematic take over commenced... But, that is not the issue... The issue is in the attempt to recognize the rights of the Indian. We, the US Government, sought to be fair on paper... but in reality we simply sought to end hostilities and apparently not be fair.
My issue is not to move the nation of Mexico to Oklahoma but rather to sort out who ought to own what.
IF a treaty exists that allocates certain land to ... say.. the Apache then those who are Apache no matter where they may currently be living ought to be able to relocate to that land... The current tribes that live there may not like that but it seems to me that again is their problem. Those with no right to settle in the US should seek entry to where they can benefit legally.
Do you see the difference?

Seriously, that's just life and the way things worked back then. If you lost you were either killed, drove off, or turned into a slave.

In a colony of ants it is the ants among themselves that sort out their conditions. When the Elephants come and stomps them out that is reality too... but my point is that the Elephant made, under Elephant law, a deal... to keep the ants from biting them. Well, now the ants say the Elephant's memory is not long at all...


I'm willing to do my part to make things right, what i want to know is exactly what is it you are willing to give up?

Remedy to the Native American Indian who may be entitled to that remedy. Free entry into the lands that are agreed belong to them. And an immigration policy that protects the citizen and his rights but not at the expense of the Native American. IOW, if the rights of the citizen can be shown to be in jeopardy then change current law to reflect this and conversely if they are not in jeopardy alter the law to reflect this. But in all cases be fair!

I don't much care if the 'illegals' come so long as they don't reduce more than they provide. I'm not so sure citizenship ought to be given to folks born in the US having parents who are here in a non legal status... nor do I think kids should be simply tossed into the heap of despair. I sorta feel that IF there is work here that is not being done by citizens then that is ample reason to enable others to perform it... issue green cards or what not... We all benefit from that condition.

I am sorta of the opinion that the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments were narrow in their intended application.... the bit about citizenship ought to have been applied to the folks who met that application... It is ill written, imo. I don't mind having a Constitution with 1000s of Amendments to obviate the interpretations that exceed the intent... as in the 14th.

EDIT: I am quite certain that I'd rather have a SCOTUS sit for a week a year than have them legislate via interpretation... I'd much prefer a quick Amendment process narrowly written to deal with the changing society we live in.... As an aside to all this Native American stuff.

 

[peonyu]

Thats alot of American babies being born there. I dont see the problem at all.

 

[BoomerD]

Thats alot of American babies being born there. I dont see the problem at all.

Actually, it's a lot of MEXICAN babies being born who get instant American citizenship...THAT'S a HUGE problem.

 

[LunarRay]

Actually, it's a lot of MEXICAN babies being born who get instant American citizenship...THAT'S a HUGE problem.

I wonder if setting up a Maternity ward in the Mexican Embassy where these folks can have their babies on what I think of as Mexican soil might solve that issue and comply with the Constitutional provision that gives the citizenship to folks born in the US? Guess we'd need Mexico to agree to the construction and all that...

I much prefer an Amendment, however. A well written one that conveys citizenship based on legality of presence.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally Posted by nobodyknows
Umm, the people want to come to the USA, not Mexico so I fail to see whatever point it is you think you are making??.

Ahh... The point is we don't have jobs for our own educated folks so why do we need more educated folks to make the task of getting a job harder? And, if there is no work for these European folks here what do they hope to gain by coming here... but, I guess that is their want in life.. IF these educated wanna be immigrants wish to enjoy their productivity then they should go where jobs exist for them...

We don't have jobs for our uneducated folks either, so why should we be letting in Mexicans by the millions? I fail to see how that is helping the employment situation for anyone. I do see that if we let more educated people that it would increase competition and if competition is good for the uneducated then it is just as good for the educated. Having a college diploma is no guarantee that you won't end up digging ditches.

 

[nobodyknows]

The roll of the courts is to provide remedy where it is due. Remedy can take the form of returning the situation back to its status quo ante or failing that - if that is not practical - to use money or some other remedy... that is often the case when there is a compelling reason to not provide a more direct remedy.
It is only reasonable when you have a treaty that provided for continued ownership of real property that has not been signed over in some manner for that title to remain with the holder... or the holder through a holder in due course.. Absent some finding that Immanent Domain factors enter in to it all the land ought to belong to who it ought to belong under law.

Well, the Sioux want the Black Hills back and it's worth a lot more then what the goverment is offering. The Homestake mine took 39.8 million ounces of gold and another 9 million ounces of silver out of the Black Hills. Good luck with making things square with them, you're going to need it

 

[nobodyknows]

Is there a treaty between the Crow and Sioux regarding their land? It seems there exists treaties between the Indian and the US Government.
The indigenous people are Native American Indians... From Canada down to where ever they are... That they fight and usurp among themselves is their issue. The European contingent starting with probably James Smith came to this land and from that a systematic take over commenced... But, that is not the issue... The issue is in the attempt to recognize the rights of the Indian. We, the US Government, sought to be fair on paper... but in reality we simply sought to end hostilities and apparently not be fair.
My issue is not to move the nation of Mexico to Oklahoma but rather to sort out who ought to own what.
IF a treaty exists that allocates certain land to ... say.. the Apache then those who are Apache no matter where they may currently be living ought to be able to relocate to that land... The current tribes that live there may not like that but it seems to me that again is their problem. Those with no right to settle in the US should seek entry to where they can benefit legally.
Do you see the difference?

I'm sure there is a long history of "treaties" between difffernt Indian tribes being made and broken. They just didn't have a written language or a unified court system like the white man did. Did the white man screw the Indians? Not just here, but in Mexico and South America too. There is no way to make right the wrongs that happened 150 years ago.

Did you know that well before the Mexican-American war the Mexican goverment was offering a bounty for Apache scalps? Those were different times and I don't see how we can be expected to apply today's standards to what our ancestors did way back when.

 

[LunarRay]

We don't have jobs for our uneducated folks either, so why should we be letting in Mexicans by the millions? I fail to see how that is helping the employment situation for anyone. I do see that if we let more educated people that it would increase competition and if competition is good for the uneducated then it is just as good for the educated. Having a college diploma is no guarantee that you won't end up digging ditches.

I don't quite get how your response is in sync with my post(s)... So I'll try to be more clear but in so doing it may come across as less sympathetic to the Mexican than I intend.

I don't really want anyone here who don't belong! However, that 'don't belong' bit is mitigated by my previous attempts to provide equity to those who may be intitled to it (Those who by treaty or otherwise have or ought to have claim to be in the US...). The Mexican who is here or who may come here to do labor that is NOT being done or won't be done by our own citizens sorta gets a pass from me... I'd issue them green cards! IOW, they'd be here legally then..
At this point in time I don't think we need to create competition for jobs... it already exists in abundance. You may not see that or not agree that to be the case but from my pov it is well established fact. IF our white collar worker is not up to the job of digging ditches and ditches need being dug then someone needs doing it... who that may be ought to be from our own non-working force...
The major function of Government is to insure the Country is healthy... That is not limited to what is easy to do or what may hurt other nations... We come first! If Isolationism in some limited form and maybe elevated is the answer then establish it...Dump NAFTA! IF that implies closing our borders fine... IF it means arresting folks who hire illegals... fine! What ever it takes to induce health to our Economy will cure or at least reduce all other issues under discussion, it seems to me..

But, be fair to our Native American friends... And to those who by treaty have some claim to be here as well.... they have rights that no other folks have...

 

[LunarRay]

Well, the Sioux want the Black Hills back and it's worth a lot more then what the goverment is offering. The Homestake mine took 39.8 million ounces of gold and another 9 million ounces of silver out of the Black Hills. Good luck with making things square with them, you're going to need it

Yeah... I think I've read about that or at least am somewhat aware of issues like that...
It don't sit well with me... All our Indian friends have been treated like they were Irish Catholics living in Belfast back when... It is universal... People find the darndest things to do to other people...

 

[nobodyknows]

I don't much care if the 'illegals' come so long as they don't reduce more than they provide. I'm not so sure citizenship ought to be given to folks born in the US having parents who are here in a non legal status... nor do I think kids should be simply tossed into the heap of despair. I sorta feel that IF there is work here that is not being done by citizens then that is ample reason to enable others to perform it... issue green cards or what not... We all benefit from that condition.

I can assure you that we don't all benifit from illegals. Trust me, I know of what I speak.

I am sorta of the opinion that the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments were narrow in their intended application.... the bit about citizenship ought to have been applied to the folks who met that application... It is ill written, imo. I don't mind having a Constitution with 1000s of Amendments to obviate the interpretations that exceed the intent... as in the 14th.

EDIT: I am quite certain that I'd rather have a SCOTUS sit for a week a year than have them legislate via interpretation... I'd much prefer a quick Amendment process narrowly written to deal with the changing society we live in.... As an aside to all this Native American stuff.

Well, at least we fully agree on something.

 

[LunarRay]

I'm sure there is a long history of "treaties" between difffernt Indian tribes being made and broken. They just didn't have a written language or a unified court system like the white man did. Did the white man screw the Indians? Not just here, but in Mexico and South America too. There is no way to make right the wrongs that happened 150 years ago.

Did you know that well before the Mexican-American war the Mexican goverment was offering a bounty for Apache scalps? Those were different times and I don't see how we can be expected to apply today's standards to what our ancestors did way back when.

I'm of the opinion and probably in the minority regarding issues like this... I don't think the 'statute' runs on this stuff... So long as the government in power then is still in power then the issue remains.

Some authority has determined what constitutes being an Indian... Some fraction of their parentage above 1/8th I think it is... The USCCR (US Commission on Civil Rights) often deals with extending rights and trying to insure equity... The Interior Dept has done a piss poor job of it all up to now and mainly cuz the voice of the Indian is so weak.

But that is just the Indian part... We've the Mexican who under at least one treaty (Guadalupe Hidalgo) retained land rights... but, I'll wager there is a McDonald's there that ain't going anywhere soon...

My family in Ireland had many holdings around the turn of the 18th century but by the 1940s it was gone... IF not by death in 1850ish then by having to leave to eat.... One such farm remains (I visited it) but in the hands of some imported family whose purpose, at that time, was to rid the land of the papist! So I'm biased... I agree! But also I see that folks trying to simply eat are motivated to go where the food is... so to speak... and often I read the words on that statue in New York Harbor... Times change... but hunger and despair are with us always... I'm kinda old now and 1916 Dublin is a memory of stories told... but stories that resound with the notion of fairness... So, in time I'll leave this earth but I'll leave it in far worse shape than when I arrived, I fear...

 

[LunarRay]

We've not yet discussed the other folks who came here and built this nation! Or were brought here under duress! Not to mention our Vietnamese folks who had no place to go...
The Asian who built the railroads seems to have faired much better... hard work perhaps... culture maybe... I'm not sure why but they've made it...

End of the day... we are a nation of various peoples who in my book are all equal... why wouldn't folks want being here and be equal regardless of their skin or religion... Why should it matter to me that I'd lose what I have to enable them to have some too... it does and I admit that too... I want what I have and don't really want to share it... but if just a bit goes I'll not miss it... and if a bit of everyone's fortune goes to enable others to live... then that is ok with me... You first... hehehehehehhe

 

[nobodyknows]

I don't quite get how your response is in sync with my post(s)... So I'll try to be more clear but in so doing it may come across as less sympathetic to the Mexican than I intend.

I don't really want anyone here who don't belong! However, that 'don't belong' bit is mitigated by my previous attempts to provide equity to those who may be intitled to it (Those who by treaty or otherwise have or ought to have claim to be in the US...). The Mexican who is here or who may come here to do labor that is NOT being done or won't be done by our own citizens sorta gets a pass from me... I'd issue them green cards! IOW, they'd be here legally then..

This is where we disagree. I know for a fact that there are illegals here doing jobs that US citizens want, need, and would do at the same pay. I know that the Mexicans at these jobs are racist and lie to get white people in trouble so they will lose their jobs. Can you imagine what would happen if white people were accused of doing that? There would be an immediate investigation and that person would be fired on the spot.

At this point in time I don't think we need to create competition for jobs... it already exists in abundance. You may not see that or not agree that to be the case but from my pov it is well established fact. IF our white collar worker is not up to the job of digging ditches and ditches need being dug then someone needs doing it... who that may be ought to be from our own non-working force...

I think those who live by the sword should die by the sword, no?

The major function of Government is to insure the Country is healthy... That is not limited to what is easy to do or what may hurt other nations... We come first! If Isolationism in some limited form and maybe elevated is the answer then establish it...Dump NAFTA! IF that implies closing our borders fine... IF it means arresting folks who hire illegals... fine! What ever it takes to induce health to our Economy will cure or at least reduce all other issues under discussion, it seems to me..

But, be fair to our Native American friends... And to those who by treaty have some claim to be here as well.... they have rights that no other folks have...

I'm all for being fair, but in our rush to be fair to one party we still have to uphold the rights of the other parties. I also think that some problems have no "fair" solutions.

 

[LunarRay]

This is where we disagree. I know for a fact that there are illegals here doing jobs that US citizens want, need, and would do at the same pay. I know that the Mexicans at these jobs are racist and lie to get white people in trouble so they will lose their jobs. Can you imagine what would happen if white people were accused of doing that? There would be an immediate investigation and that person would be fired on the spot.

Ok... I'll defer to your 'know for a fact'... I don't know that but then I'm thinking about stuff like Picking Fruit and Nanny Programs and Cleaning House, etc.

I think those who live by the sword should die by the sword, no?

Seems a bit graphic to my tastes... I think fairness in all things is a good place to start and end.

I'm all for being fair, but in our rush to be fair to one party we still have to uphold the rights of the other parties. I also think that some problems have no "fair" solutions.

I think that last sentence is true. But, by fair if that is in the eye of the beholder they have to settle for an equitable solution... like in eminent domain... folks want their house etc.. but the highway is going there... so the State pays them FMV (maybe).... that is the way it is... and I guess we have to like it or at least abide by it.
The first sentence of the last para is exactly what I mean by fair... but under law fair.... like in a holder through a holder in due course... that is a legal bit that the UCC indicates maintains a flow of sorts of ... I'll use title to the property in this case....and defenses of the parties involved... But I prefer to be exact... it will suffice atm, however...

EDIT: Because I used the terms loosely, I'll edit in basically what the Act says: "But a holder who derives his title through a holder in due course, and who is not himself a party to any fraud or illegality affecting the instrument, has all the rights of such prior holder in respect of all parties prior to the latter." So it becomes important that the holder in due course etc. etc... mainly for negotiable instruments...

Additionally, Real Property falls under the Statute of Frauds... it requires a signing to effect transfer... but, if it is part of the deceased's estate then we deal with issues like intestate and wills etc... to know who should have title to property these Mexican treaties provided for...