Nice try. You live in a big fantasy world don't you. The US Constitution was not written for the British under the King, the French Canadians, nor the persons of the Far East in the 1700's. It was written for Americans.

Your words. Not mine. Anywhere.

You really get angry when people disagree with you don't you. :D

Trot that racist bullshit elsewhere - get back to getting the damn concrete.

Oh, and did you get the memo? We need to double the order - Apparently this thing has to go 10' underground as well. It seems we have a little issue with tunnels. BrianR will get the schematics over to you this week.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Too bad 220 years of SCOTUS rulings disagree with you. The constitution applies to anyone in US custody/jurisdiction unless specifically stated otherwise, because the constitution is a list of restrictions on government power, not an inclusive list of personal liberties.

You've never read it, have you?

Damn, you're easy, Merc.

Let me get this straight...if you point out blatant racism, you're a racist?

:lol:

So you are going to now try to convince me that they wrote it for the King of England. Nice.

Should I type slower, Merc? I mean, you can't POSSIBLY be THIS stupid, can you?

Do always spend this much energy trying to get people to believe what you type?

Nope. I'm just curious now, as to how dumb you really are.

The Constitution is a contract between the Federal government and the states. Nothing more.

Non-citizens have the right to be deported to their country of origin.

"We the People of the United States.." not we the people of England, or we the people of Brazil.

Nice try.

I'm sorry you're an ignorant yahoo.

Still, someday you might consider actually reading it.

Like I said, you really need to trade in that crystal ball that stinks so bad.

No, seriously, you really are ignorant. You don't even know what the constitution is supposed to represent, let alone what it says.

You're hilarious. You're the very caricature of the dittohead.

Let me guess, you got that from your crystal ball too.

No, I got that from reading your hilariously incorrect statements about the US constitution, for one thing.

You're the classic American yahoo. You don't even understand your own system of government.

Dude give it up. Are you Radar's twin brother? You are nothing more than another person who thinks they are an expert at something you have convinced yourself you are right about. The world is filled with people like you. Get in line and get a helmet. I don't care what you believe about it. Now get back to that crystal ball and tell me more about myself. :D

And do some shots or something. Relax.

No, seriously, tell me where the constitution is declared to be a contract between the federal government and the states?

I am a totally captive audience, here.

:lol:

Hannity, Rush, and Boortz told me so at the latest hippie neocon convention where we were all doing some Koolaid-guzzling with sheep. It must be twew..

They read it in their crystal balls. Serious.

I have rights beyond deportation.

It doesn't say "We the Legal Citizens of the United States"

nice try.

I do believe that anyone here under legal immigration status has legal rights which are protected under the Constitution. The problem is with illegal immigrants and those arrested under other circumstances outside the borders of the US. The subject is obviously a debateable one or we wouldn't have many of the problems we have in detaining non-citizens.

Either he can't tell the difference between "the people" and "no person/any person", or he doesn't consider brown folks to be "persons".

The problem we have is that this administration and the one before it don't care much about the constitution.

There you go hating on people of color. Man you need to seek help for that.

Actually his weak attempts to equate immigration control to some sort of racist ideals is often used by supporters of open borders in an attempt to demonize those who disagree with them. Eh, whateva...

Can you even read? No, seriously.

I'm guessing you're not of Jewish descent then? because I'm pretty sure they didn't have much time or opportunity to fill in the correct paperwork for their destinations before they fled from the Nazis.

Hey look, here comes Godwin.

Umm...I don't think we can call out the Godwin card on this one. The discussion had ranged onto people seeking asylum and the holocaust is entirely appropriate to that discussion.

Calling Quirk's exception, eh Dana?

I agree about the robber barons. Trust me, I have been raging about that issue for years. However, the argument that illegal immigrants cost taxpayers many billions of dollars every year is valid, and the fact that they send billions to Mexico every year makes it an even bigger slap in the face. The laws need to be enforced. As individuals the damage may not be all that significant, but as a whole, it is enormous.

http://geeks.pirillo.com/forum/topic...Comment1472397
http://www.cairco.org/econ/econ.html
https://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejo...9741669_2.html

I tried long and hard to avoid the possibility of invoking Godwin, but beest assured me that it really was the correct term in this context. And he's as sound as they come. Anyone who has ever been offended by anything he posted should just jump off a cliff right now.

I'm not so sure it's all that appropriate of a comparison given the drastically different circumstances under which the Jews and others were fleeing, as opposed to the current US/Mexico situation. Things may be bad in Mexico right now, but the events of and leading up to the Holocaust were on a totally different level. Yeah on a superficial basis it works, people fleeing a bad situation where innocents are being killed, but the greater details of both show that's where the similarities really end. And to me that kind of cheapens the attempted comparison.

Yeah, I wasnt being specific about Mexicans though. The conversation had moved on to asylum more generally.

I still call Godwin on this one. It was a cheap line meant to make people cringe and think "oh, we can't have that". The reality is our current immigration issues have absolutely nothing to do with racial extermination. If Canada suddenly announces they'll execute anyone with green eyes, then certainly guidelines have to change with the new and temporary circumstances. A rush of green eyed folk would hit the borders and the US would have to make a choice about the whole group of people.

I call bullshit. Even though the issue might not be entirely focused on race, that aspect is still there and effects decisions and viewpoints consciously or subconsciously.

The question is whether these immigrants are beneficial to our society or not. If China starts deciding that engineers are a detriment to their society and they start moving over here, assimilate, and don't cause problems, no one would criticize. The problem is that many see the new illegal immigrants as more harmful to our society and the fact that they do not share our culture and looks adds to that.

Many people do not like the Somalis in Minneapolis, even though the vast majority are here legally, because they have a different culture, looks, sometime cause problems, and for the most part refuse to assimilate into our culture. I have a very strong feeling that the recent immigrant issue has a lot to do with this and the fact that many come here illegally brings out the activism and outspokenness to get them out. Without those problems, no one would care to enforce the law.

And, it is a recorded concept that in our racist society, people of color are not as trusted as whites. Blacks have been shown to be followed more often by security guards then whites. Blacks skipping school brings different reactions then whites skipping school. Whether this mindset is conscious or subconscious does not matter but it still exists and I can attest with my own initial reactions as well. Because of this, it is impossible to totally separate race from this issue.

It would be stupid to blindly throw around the word racist because that is false in many circumstances but it would also be stupid to separate race from the issue entirely because race do influence our decisions whether we realize it or not.

I think that is an over charaterization of society at large. Pockets of racism exist everywhere in the world and everywhere in the US, no region or country is immune. It does not excuse it, but let's not generalize that it motivates much of our immigration policy or need for control.

While there are some obviously prejudiced idiots in the world that isn't what this is about.

Anyone who wants to come be a productive member of our society and follows the legal process should be welcomed with open arms. Those that didn't follow the process can get out. It is as simple as that. Skin color is irrelevant.

I can't agree more. I will say that I think we need to look at some cases where people are making a significant contribution to society and look at those on a case by case basis. But jumping the border and dropping a baby needs to stop.

I'm all in favor of easing the restrictions, making the process easier, and opening up the country to anyone who will follow the damn legal process. At the same time the country needs to adopt the e-verify system, yank the license from any business caught knowingly employing illegals, and toss any illegal caught within the borders.

Make breaking the law more painful than following the law and surprise surprise people will probably follow it.

No, it would not be an overgeneralizaton to state that racism influences who we are just like it would not be an overgeneralizaton to state that materialism influences us. Don't confuse racism with discrimination because they are not the same.

Racism is a social doctrine, not an action. Its similar to materalism (hence the -ism in both words). We all have materalistic influences because we were raised in a materalistic society and we, even people of color, all have racist influnces because we were raised in a racist society.

Does this mean you mean you are basing your views on race? No. I am stating that because of we are raised in a racist society it is impossible to seperate race from this issue.

Racism is not just prejudice idiots. Racism is anything that has to deal with putting one "race" of people above another. This can mean joining the KKK, this can mean going out of your way to help people of color, or it could mean that you have inital racist thought that you autmoatically discard and never act upon. Some types of racism are extremely bad and some are ones we can never rid from ourselves.

So, since we all, or vast majority, have instinctual internal racist thoughts we can conclude that we are subconciously racist to a point, even if we never act upon it. And since we are subconciously racist, that can influence our views on who is a productive member of society or not without us knowing.

Yes, I thought I made that clear when I used Chinese engineers as an example. The deciding factor is the combination of illegal immigrants and the view of being non-productive members of society. My point is that race influences, even subtley, who we view as being productive members of society so it can not be discarded. And please don't take that last statement and make a hyperbole, that is not my intention.

Any foreigner that goes through the proper paperwork should be admitted in turn, without anyone guessing whether they will become a productive citizen or not.

I didn't say we get to judge whether they will be or not. I said anyone who wants to be a productive member of our society and follows the legal process should be welcomed with open arms. I want our immigration process to be so open and easy that only criminals will attempt to enter illegally.

Much of what you have stated may be true in a sociology class. In reality I don't think that most people think that way, nor could you generalize about society at large. There are some who are racist regardless of color and nothing is going to change the majority who think like that. It is my opinion that the majority of people don't think or function in society within a racist framework.

Further you have stated that "we all, or vast majority, have instinctual internal racist thoughts" and I think you would have a difficult time proving that notion. So I would have to reject that notion as being your opinion because I disagree.

I agree with you and I didn't mean that in a sense that we get to judge what groups are allowed in or not. I am saying that groups that are seen as unproductive are negatively judged by large groups of society. That in no way should determine who we allow in our not and I wasn't trying to accuse you of saying that we should.

It would be hard to prove or disprove my argument because we are looking at what individuals initally think, not do. I still do support my theory because of two big factors.

One, I feel my own subconcious racist thoughts and everyone that I've talked to (many different backgrounds) feel it as well. That even includes blacks and other people of color.

I also notice that unless a person of color is raised in a enviornment with constant contact with whites, they tend to stick to people of their own race or other people of color instead of whites.

Those two really tell me something is up.

Lemme see if I get what you are saying here. You have these initial thoughts/opinions based upon a persons color/creed or whatever and you have issues with that.
What about animals? Do you have those same initial impressions of them? Like a hawk versus a robin, or a squirrel versus a skunk.

Where could that analogy possibly go?

What are you talking about? What is my issue?

My entire point is that you cannot completely seperate race and immigration because of subconcious prejudice.

How do you substantiate that this exists?

ok, I think I got you, so what you are saying is that because a person has subconscious thoughts, then they may be a racist or be predisposed to racist tendencies.

I already told you my two reasons and that it is impossible to prove or disprove since they are personal.

I would just stick with racial tendencies because throwing in racist is an entire discussion altogether. But yes, if a person has subconcious racist thoughts, they may be predisposed to racist tendencies without knowing it. That is why I argue it is impossible to seperate race from immigration issues because we are constantly judging immigration groups based on race.

When approaching, or are being approached by, a person, I note size, sex, hair, dress, color, body language, etc.

If I know them, I immediately search my memory for previous behavior by that person... friend or foe, like or dislike, etc.

In the case of a stranger I search my memory for previous experiences with people with similar appearance.
Bigger would be more of a threat than smaller, male would be more of a threat than female(except in court),
someone in rags would be more of a threat than in a suit, and so on.

Of course there's no guarantee the well dressed little woman won't kill me, but I have to make a judgment on past experience.
I suppose second hand experience via the media or stories from peers would be in my database too.
I guess you're calling that prejudice, but I have to rely on what I've got.

You turned this into justification for prejudice, which I purposedly avoided. Prejudice is natural and unavoidable and but it does exist and it does becomes greater when we are born into a society with preexisting seperations and prejudices.

If you are attacked by a homeless person with green eyes you will probably avoid the homeless while not avoiding someone with green eyes because you grew up in a society where class seperation and prejudices exist but not eye color seperation and prejudice. So, since we grew up in a society where racial seperation and prejudice exist, we will most likely stereotype racial groups, which effect our perception and "liking" towards them.

I am saying in this from an observational standpoint and remember my intial claim is that we cannot completely seperate racial and immigration issues because of subconcious prejudices. I am not adding morality into here and I am not saying prejudice is justified or not.

Not a justification, a reality.
How could I know the person attacking me was homeless? I can't, but I can know they had green eyes, and any other things I can personally see. There is no way I can know a strangers socio-economic, educational, or religious background, I can only go by appearance in one on one situations.

Sure, if you grow up in the city you'll likely be wary of wild animals, from what other people have said, until you have a chance to have your own experiences and form your own opinion.
But that wouldn't necessarily keep you from contributing to wildlife support organizations, because as a human being you have the intellectual capacity to reason wild animals are not bad.

My intellectual capacity tells me that immigrants are not bad, but people that enter this country illegally are criminals and should be removed, not supported.

We both agree its a reality.

I don't disagree with this but unless you are going off on your own tangent, this was not my point. I was responding to this quote...

which I disagreed with for the reason I have given above.

Which comes straight out of a freshman level sociology class.

Which has anything to do with the argument how?

But then again, the idea that crime is correlated to poverty is straight out of a freshman level sociology class. Being in the lower class must just be a result of being immoral then...

Isn't "freshman level ... class" another way of saying "basically true, though there are complications you'll get to later"? Which is pretty much the way generalizations are supposed to work?

And increased ice cream sales means more shark attacks! Oh wait, that's just Summer.

To which I may add, get back to us in 20 years and let us know if your assumptions have altered.

If it were math or a real science... sure. In this case it is a bunch of people sitting around talking about why life is unfair.

Meanwhile, I present without prejudice, Mexico. pfd

:biggrin: