Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
Karl\'s Brother
2410 Followers
sunsacredten
1116 Followers
Anees Saddique
1638 Followers
Mihalcea Razvan-Teodor (RaaVi)
2018 Followers
TheHoopDoctors.com
8887 Followers
Tharun Jose
637 Followers
Cecil Helton
12880 Followers
Ciaran Duffy
675 Followers
fenririiiAug 16, 2010
Yet another thing we stole from the Native Americans.
hackiewackieAug 16, 2010
What are the rest of the things?
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
Land
danj484Aug 16, 2010
Almost literally everything.
teacher2beAug 16, 2010
Corn...on the cob.
torisutanAug 16, 2010
Culture. Rights. Sobriety. All the good land. The name "American". Oh, and Pocahontas.
tarantulusAug 16, 2010
dignity?
torisutanAug 16, 2010
Um, I'm pretty sure my comment was mistaken for an attack on Native Americans. We stole their culture from them and now many tribes don't even know their own histories. We stole their rights from them and made them less than slaves (for a long time). We got them hooked on alcohol so we could control them better. We took all the good land and left them with the s**ttiest land. We stole the name "American" from them. And we stole their stories and made mockeries of them in movies like Pocahontas.
xophermvAug 16, 2010
@torisutan
Our culture is generally Euro-centric. We did not steal that from Native Americans.
Native Americans were not originally part of this nation. They had their own tribes and nations, which the US successfully fought and destroyed. We allowed them to join our nation and gave their tribes sovereign rights to control their own land. Today their people have the same rights as any other American. We did not steal their rights, nor did we make them less than slaves, whatever that means.
We did not make them drink alcohol. And we did not make them alcoholics. At most, we introduced them to alcohol, but that's it.
We did take a lot of land, but we also left a lot of land. Tribes in the west have tons of good land.
As for the name "American", the idea that we stole that is laughable. America comes from the Italian explorer Amerigo Vespucci.
higherlogicAug 16, 2010
Well they weren't native to North America in the first place, they had to cross the Bering Strait to get here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Americas#Migration_into_the_continents
torisutanAug 16, 2010
@Xopher: By "stole" I don't mean we took it and used it as our own (though we did utilize many of their farming practices and certain other crafts they mastered), I mean we took it from them and threw it away. They don't have a culture anymore, at least nothing even remotely resembling what they once had, and it's because we drove them out of their lands and forced them onto reservations where they had never been, and amidst other tribes they had never met. We separated families and tribes arbitrarily which only further dissolved their rich cultures.
We did indeed steal their rights, when we took their land (now I know they had no concept of land ownership, but it doesn't change the fact that what was their land became ours through a series of battles and tricks). We also didn't offer them the right to vote even though they lived on land we "owned".
We introduced them to alcohol, and overvalued it for them so they gave up the vast majority of their wealth for maybe one month's worth of beer. I'd say that we got them addicted and abused that fact once we realized they would pay anything to get alcohol.
Have you been to the west? Seen the land they get? It's s**t. Absolute s**t. The only good thing about it is that it's theirs and they can build casinos if they have the money, which most don't.
Great for Vespucci, he coined the word "American". And that word was a label for everything in the America's. From American Pines to American Horses to American Rivers, everything was American. Including the natives. We came and planted a flag and said, "Nope, WE'RE Americans now, you are all a bunch of savages."
torrangeAug 16, 2010
XopherMV
not sure what history you are reading - look into the Trail of Tears and the Sioux in the Black Hills for references to how well we treated the Native Americans.
We may not have stolen their culture but we sure did destroy it.
wussAug 16, 2010
Don't you love it when a super-obscure cartoon about native americans and pilgrims turns a bunch of digg users into the fields foremost brilliant minds of Native American politics, history and culture.
Oh the internet, u so silly.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
curunirAug 16, 2010
Unchecked immigration should be stopped before we're overrun and our land is taken from us. Gotcha. Thank you for the clear and concise message.
binkythetoasterAug 16, 2010
We? What do you mean "we?" Every single participant in that exchange is dead today, and has been for hundreds of years. I had absolutely nothing to do with it, and neither did my ancestors as far back as my grandfathers, nor did you, for that matter.
As for "stole," what did you think was going to happen when a relatively advanced civilization runs into a relatively primitive one? We don't mourn the roaming tribes in the prehistoric Fertile Crescent when the pre-Sumerians cordoned off their migration paths for agriculture and grazing, do we? This story has played out more times than we can count in the history of humanity, and you're going to get all worked up about this one because you have some misplaced guilt about living better than just about everyone else, alive or dead. To make up for it, you'd apply whatever political, economic, and intellectual power you possess to the end of stripping that life from _everyone_else_, except for a handful that you can't and never will be able to touch. Yeah. That seems like a good idea.
mxm111Aug 16, 2010
"This story has played out more times than we can count in the history of humanity,"
This does it make it right, though. Expected, yes, but right? NO!
elisevilleAug 17, 2010
Nice, Binky. How clear an understanding of the term ancestor! I have no idea who your ancestors were, but at least one of mine was here as a French illegal immigrant trapper around 1600, and another lost line was native from a north-east or perhaps Canadian tribe. I recognize that those who came before and ultimately made me, affect much of who I am and what I have. I also know that many of them were tragically involved in the often violent theft from and murder of other ancestors of mine.
But times and civilizations can change. They must change.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
atarioAug 17, 2010
Maybe you don't, you insensitive clod!
:'(
mxm111Aug 16, 2010
"Yet another thing we stole from the Native Americans."
No, no! The babies we made ourselves.
(Please no "that what she said" jokes)
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
Yes but we gave them casinos...fair trade right?
rvignesh9008Aug 16, 2010
Sounds right!
tyger11Aug 16, 2010
They also got free used blankets. Free!
UphemismAug 16, 2010
Annnnd, for a limited time, we'll throw in with no extra cost....
SMALLPOX!!
Yes, you heard it right folks, call right now and you can receive your very own life long pets!!!
Seriously, people were s**ts to each other. Hard not to feel bad about all that.
daimposterAug 16, 2010
it wouldn't be free used blankets if they weren't free. am i right?
jonprojectAug 16, 2010
HI BILLY MAYS HERE!
torisutanAug 16, 2010
Don't forget we put them in Peter Pan!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_at9dOElQk
;)
Not racist at all...
smokeydabearAug 16, 2010
And meth!
namja23Aug 16, 2010
Just like how we gave them people in Africa a Bible for all their people, land and diamonds.
torisutanAug 16, 2010
Psh. Those aren't "people", they're like, maybe 3/5ths of a person.
/s should be obvious.
ineedanewsn1992Aug 16, 2010
Your bible is now diamonds.
bracomadarAug 17, 2010
In return, the Native Americans gave you cancer causing tobacco.
danielwfletcherAug 16, 2010
Real Talk
meetjoewhiteAug 16, 2010
white people...
teacher2beAug 16, 2010
KICK ASS!
theamazingkortAug 16, 2010
Oh boy, I can't wait until you're teaching our nation's children how to shave their heads and goose step.
What a bright future you're providing.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
UphemismAug 16, 2010
@theamazingkort -
Lets play a game of reversal...
==================
MeetJoeWhite - Black people.....
Teacher2be - KICK ASS.....
=============
This never would be considered a racist statement, and yet you took it as if Teacher2be was a racist, for the same thing...Why?
whipnetAug 16, 2010
That's right theamazingkort!! White's are NOT allowed to be proud of their race. When they try, they get labeled racist and xenophobic. Why is that theamazingkort?
*
smacktimeAug 16, 2010
Hell nah because we are to busy stealing your s**t
dalhectarAug 16, 2010
ARE TASTY!
UphemismAug 17, 2010
Actually, I seem to remember an article on some tribes of cannibals. They were asked which people they liked best and they said that "whites" were too salty, "blacks" were OK, but what they really liked was the tasty tasty Asians.
OK, so I added the tasty part...
evilregisAug 17, 2010
...this s**t is THOROUGHLY good.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4f9zR5yzY
mwtappAug 16, 2010
Pfft, how did they get across the border?
Closed AccountAug 17, 2010
DEY TERK OUR JERBBSSS!!!
no really...they took our crops, our land, our homes, our buffalo, our women...
Closed AccountAug 17, 2010
But we gave you guys smallpox...wait, what?
factorof13Aug 16, 2010
Shhh.. we don't speak of that.
taxmoreAug 16, 2010
How did illegal immigration work out for the Indians?
laserfishAug 16, 2010
You're afraid the Mexicans are going to give us smallpox blankets, burn our towns, rape our women and drive us into reservations?
rpatrick819Aug 16, 2010
Not yet.
torisutanAug 16, 2010
Not intentionally, but because of the heavy catholicism of many latin american countries condoms are not in wide use so STD's are widespread (in fact they have the highest amount of STD infected people on Earth http://www.avert.org/std-statistics.htm), and when they come here they continue the practice of un-safe sex which further spreads STD's amongst the general population.
Not bigoted, just something we should think about when we create our new, easier naturalization program for illegals; we should make sure we include sex education in it to protect not only ourselves but their own children and partners as well from the threat of STD's. I'd wager a guess that many people in Latin American countries don't even know what an STD is*, let alone how to prevent its spread, because the Catholic Church doesn't discuss those things.
*Many people in those nations do know about STDs and safe-sex now, thanks to efforts by WHO and various condom manufacturers who want to expand their business while protecting people from disease. This does not change the fact that Latin America has the highest infection rate worldwide.
tightscrummyAug 16, 2010
Well, yeah.
808atheistAug 16, 2010
And then give us some mind blowing technologies that we would have never invented ourselves?
torisutanAug 16, 2010
Really? Who buried my comment? I even linked to- oh wait, for some reason they changed their f**king address. Who does that in the middle of the day?!
new link: http://www.avert.org/worldstats.htm
Latin America has the highest rate of STD infection globally, so we do need to educate people coming from there about safe sex and STD identification and prevention.
I am not bigoted. A bigot would say we should keep all those damn infected people out of our clean country. A) our nation is far from clean. B) they deserve to be educated about sex since the catholic church won't do it.
torrangeAug 16, 2010
Them latins are coming here to infect our women with STDs, I say we just start shooting them as soon as they cross the border. We could set up hunting trips for rich rednecks.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mxm111Aug 16, 2010
"You're afraid the Mexicans are going to give us smallpox blankets, burn our towns, rape our women and drive us into reservations?"
Let me guess, you do not watch Fox News?!
jjuanml22Aug 16, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
jdmulloyAug 17, 2010
@jjuanml22
I'm guessing you mean condemned instead of condoned here
"I remembered he said the the church condoned those who only have sex for pleasure and that sex was solely for reproduction."
billorlyAug 17, 2010
@jjuanml22
I'm guessing you meant to be coherent.
Beyond the likely word swap, I have no idea what you were trying to say.
robiczAug 17, 2010
turisutan; i dont see any mention of Mexicans or Mexico in your link. Why dont you go check this one out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_HIV/AIDS_adult_prevalence_rate
And in Mexico, the school system does have sex ed, since they are by Constitution secular. In teh United states, teenagers are sexually active earlier than in mexico, that probably means they are less mature to make the decision to use contraception.
http://www.lifesundobutton.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/Screen-shot-2010-02-22-at-6.49.26-PM.png
I understand you are talking about Latin America, but that is a generalization at Mexico´s expense.
UphemismAug 16, 2010
In order for it to be illegal immigration, they would have had to have a law on immigration for it to be broken...
torisutanAug 16, 2010
There is a law, it states that any and all visitors or immigrants to the United States must register with the Immigration and Customs Officials and obtain a visa for work, travel, or other reason. If they plan on staying longer than a visa lasts, they must apply for and receive a green-card prior to entering our borders or after obtaining the necessary visa to live here while they apply.
Currently the system is a hassle and a half to get through, even for people from England. My good friend arrived from England back in 2003 and only in 2007 did the paperwork to become a citizen finally go through. They had to apply for visas multiple times because of lost paperwork and denied requests over stupid things like illegible handwriting. Can you imagine a non-english speaker trying to go through all that? This is why immigration reform is a must.
Also, many people don't know this, but the Immigration Act of 1990 limits the number of immigrants to the U.S. to 700,000 per year, and gives preference to people who have family here already or have job skills that can help the economy grow.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
UphemismAug 16, 2010
@Torisutan
I can't say I disagree, but my remark about breaking the law was in response to taxmore's statement about the European settlers being illegal immigrants..
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
@torisutan
He was talking about native Americans not having immigration laws.
torisutanAug 16, 2010
Ah. Damn firefox, it formats digg weirdly for me. I'm going back to Chrome!
ieatskunkAug 17, 2010
Ha ha. That is a great answer to this tired old argument.
elliotysAug 16, 2010
You have to laugh at the irony of white people in this country denouncing immigrants and "anchor babies". I'm pretty sure if you were to look up our family trees everyone of us is a product of "anchor babies".
lpse2000Aug 16, 2010
No, legal immigration and proper procedure is NOT anchor babies. No one denounces immigrants. We denounce ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. You people really should start adding that word to your vocabulary.
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
Yeah, my family didn't even get here - quite legally - until 1991.... Amusingly enough (and quite apropos of the comic) my husband is about 1/2 Native American - Choctaw and Cherokee mix. So our kids are going to be both first generation Americans AND Native American.
taiboAug 16, 2010
It's worth pointing out that the US broke a fair amount of treaties with the Indian Nations, some which involved immigration.
keessAug 16, 2010
How many americans are the descendent's exclusively of people who had to go through modern immigration processes? How many had ancestors who simply came off a boat and became americans? I think that's the point; the cartoonist isn't trying to conflate "legal" and illegal immigrants, but to point out that many americans are descendent's of people who went through little to no more formalities than illegal immigrants do to. Certainly that's true of anyone who can claim to be descended from any of the earliest settlers.
UphemismAug 16, 2010
After legal immigration you are probably right. Want to guess the important word in that sentence?
crackinthebox10Aug 16, 2010
nope, MY great great grandparents have their signatures on the Ellis Island list, and were both deemed legal citizens along with my great grandfather.
pintomp3Aug 16, 2010
Are you saying we should set up something like Ellis Island on the southern border?
curunirAug 16, 2010
@pintomp3:
Yes. Why not? Get the illegals out, increase the quotas (dramatically), and provide a legal entryway.
But it will never happen, because then businesses can't hire them for less than minimum wage while avoiding taxes, and the Dems can't use amnesty to create millions of new voters.
crackinthebox10Aug 16, 2010
no, I am saying that no one in my family was, or is, an 'anchor baby'
elliotysAug 16, 2010
But that's the point. "Anchor babies" ARE LEGAL US citizens, and there are no provisions in the laws that automatically grants their parents citizenship. In fact under current laws, a child born in the US can't even apply to have his parents become citizens until the child reaches the age of 21.
You guys are literally inventing a problem out of thin air.
drmangrumAug 16, 2010
But the parents aren't. THAT'S the problem. The parents are gaining citizenship by proxy since you can't deny a child it's parents and you can't deport a citizen. The parents get to stay here without going through the legal immigration process.
That problem didn't come from thin air.
13point1Aug 17, 2010
That's an outright lie, drmangrum. Did you come up with that yourself or did someone on Fixed News tell it to you?
Closed AccountAug 17, 2010
@Drmangrum
Really, a child can't be denied it's parents? Where did you get that? Really, I'd like to know...
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
My family didn't even get here - quite legally - until 1991, so you can cross out that generic "you" right there....
Amusingly enough (and quite apropos of the comic, if not so much this thread) my husband is about 1/2 Native American - Choctaw and Cherokee mix. So our kids are going to be both first generation Americans AND Native American. Gotta love this country.
reposadoAug 17, 2010
I am Asian and shockingly I can see how massive illegal influx of poor and uneducated group of people is bad for the host country.
ppchickieAug 17, 2010
I am Asian too. Please stop talking. You're embarrassing us.
itomatoAug 17, 2010
Nobody owns this land. There were people here before. They didn't honor what was already in place, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion. Not in English, anyway..Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
bloodypythonAug 16, 2010
I am so sick of that toyota ad flying out and talking
smokeydabearAug 16, 2010
Yeah I remember when digg had the occasional advertisement to "keep them running going." Now this s**thole is rife with all kinds of f**king stupid ads.
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
Worst Digg ad ever!! I have heard that damn video start probably 30 times today.
korvan504521Aug 16, 2010
Dragon age?
torisutanAug 16, 2010
f**k Toyota, I like my car to accelerate only when I tell it to. Honda is where it's at for Japanese cars.
And as far as American... well if American companies would stop building these awesome concept cars and then f**king ruining them for consumers (Chevy Volt, anyone? Look up the concept car, then look up what it looks like now), maybe I'd buy some american cars...
But yeah, f**k that ad. One more reason not to buy Toyota.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
torisutanAug 16, 2010
Oh, seriously? Buried? Read this and look at the picture.
http://cobb.typepad.com/cobb/2010/07/government-motors.html
f**k you (whoever you are) and your blind love of american car companies. Explain why they beat their cars with the ugly stick before you go and bury me. There's no reason to make it ugly, not when they could be making it sexy and actually selling it. I would've bought that thing in the concept form.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
I buried you not for anything you said, but for whining because you got two lousy thumbs-down. If you're taking yourself THAT seriously, I suggest to you that the Internet isn't a sufficiently ego-friendly place for you to frequent.
Seriously dude, you need to start watching your blood pressure.
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
I would like to thank bloodypython, Smokeydabear, and jdames1980 for validating my decision to **not** whitelist Digg.
csfflameAug 16, 2010
It's called adblock plus, learn to use it.
Also thanks for making me not feel bad about not white-listing digg
jfallon126Aug 16, 2010
How do you not have AdBlock?
bloodypythonAug 16, 2010
I do but I had (emphasis on had) digg whitelisted...even after the dragon age one I persevered but they lost me now.
rileyman6678Aug 16, 2010
adblock plus, bitch
furtthepirateAug 16, 2010
DRAGON AGE!
galevisAug 17, 2010
What Toyota ad?
Closed AccountAug 17, 2010
I think some people cherry-pick the comments section and just breeze past where people tell them to install adblock.
hotpuck6Aug 17, 2010
I used to have all my favorites white listed, and all of them except for Digg still are. It has by far the most obnoxious and intrusive ads.
eurynom0sAug 16, 2010
Bob: I hate immigrants!
Jim: Aren't you second generation?
Bob: That's different!
Jim: Uh...how so?
Bob: IT JUST IS!!!
UphemismAug 16, 2010
Bob: I hate immigrants!
Jim: Aren't you second generation?
Bob: That's different!
Jim: Uh...how so?
Bob: My parents did it legally.
FTFY
eurynom0sAug 16, 2010
derkadurbs!
therednewtAug 16, 2010
When my family came over here, we didn't have to face the same restrictions though. Hell, most of these immigrants don't even have a legal path.
UphemismAug 16, 2010
@Eury - So, that means you have no intellegent response. Got it.
@TheRedNewt - I think you'll find that quite different. Depending on where your grandparents came from there was quite an issue even getting to the shores. There were food issues(As in none), and health issues the likes none of us can imagine today. Now, there probably wasn't the line ups and regulations once they landed on shore and someone said they could stay - but once here they also didn't have any of the social programs those both legally and illegal now enjoy...
As for there not even a legal path for them to do that, I am curious why do you say that? How is there a legal path for everyone but those from the South?
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
vegetablelambAug 16, 2010
"Bob: My parents did it legally."
not necessarily:
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/07/what-we-talk-about-when-we-talk-about-immigration-part-i/60523/
sanmanAug 17, 2010
Bob: fetuses don't have some automatic right to be born!
Jim: You got to be born, didn't you?
Bob: That's different!
Jim: How so?
Bob: IT JUST IS!!
xaevierAug 16, 2010
I have nothing against immigration but I sure as hell have an issue against illegal immigration.
If people from Mexico want to move here they should have to go through all the BS paperwork that my grandfather did.
crrrackAug 16, 2010
There is no paperwork that they can go through to come here legally.
And if your grandfather came when mine did there was no paperwork necessary to immigrate other than a single form filled out by an immigration officer at Ellis Island.
UphemismAug 16, 2010
Why is there no paperwork to get in? What are the other legal immigrants filling out, and why can't those from the south use the same?
Serious question.
therednewtAug 16, 2010
Exactly.
Honestly, our economy is wholly dependent on this source of labor at this point, which means we need to set up someway to bring workers into this country legally as part of our solution.
crrrackAug 16, 2010
@Uphemism: There is no program under which they are eligible to apply for a visa, other than a student visa. To get a visa -- even a tourist visa -- from Mexico or any other country in Central America -- you have to prove that you have a certain amount of assets, such as owning a house, having more than X dollars in the bank (not sure about the current level of X -- but it's in the tens of thousands of dollars). The people who can do this are (by design) not the ones coming illegally.
From most countries in Europe and Asia tourist visas are very easy (if not automatic) to acquire.
trainofthought6Aug 16, 2010
The immigration system in this country is a goddamn mess. One of my good friends moved to America from Sweden several years ago, and his family came in the legal way. They've been waiting on their greencards for seven f**king years, and because of that my friend can't get any financial aid for college.
UphemismAug 16, 2010
@Crrrack
Thanks for the response. However you have confused me somewhat, I hope you will help me out..You said..
"There is no program under which they are eligible to apply for a visa, other than a student visa."
- Which is horrible, why is that? What was the rational behind it?
But then you say :
" To get a visa -- even a tourist visa -- from Mexico or any other country in Central America -- you have to prove that......"
- Which seems to say that you can get a visa you just have to meet horribly high standards...
Anyway, thanks for the response. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
torisutanAug 16, 2010
@crrrack: Yeah there is, they can apply for work visas in order to immigrate here, then while they are here building their life they can apply for a green-card to extend their legal stay here. Once that's done they can begin the 5 year process of naturalization, though it does require them to learn at least rudimentary English so it's best if they start down in their native country before coming here.
The system is a pain in the ass and it needs to be changed, but the system is still there for people to immigrate legally, whether it's efficient or not.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
markglAug 16, 2010
Times change.
crrrackAug 16, 2010
@Uphemism: I meant that there is no way the actual people who are coming here can qualify for a visa, not that any Mexican can. Even for people that are middle class an employed in Mexico it can be hard to get a visa -- I work with people that have a hard time coming to trade shows in the US for this reason.
@torisutan: The application for a work visa is typically done by an employer, not by the immigrant (there are several types of visa, but for the type of visa that the bulk of undocumented workers might be eligible for this is true). Because of this the application is almost always done from the US, not Mexico, which means they must have gotten here somehow first which brings us back to the beginning.
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
@torisutan
no you _cannot_ apply for a work visa.
I am a legal worker in the US and that's only because my employers was willing to put in around 9k in lawyer fees and other applications and that was only because I am a software engineer and im making them a lot more money than that. There really is no way for them to come work here legally.
bromarAug 16, 2010
there are only a limited number of work visa's that the US gives out every year. Those visa's also require that your employer fills out the required paper work, and that you are in some sort of specialized profession with the required approved prerequisites. So if you dont have some sort of higher education it is very difficult to obtain this.
So this is very unlikely from poor immigrants who want to move to the US
Closed AccountAug 17, 2010
There are immigration stations and embassys. All we want to do is give them a social security number and a note to remind them to pay their taxes
floodleAug 17, 2010
Nonsense, I emmigrated to the US 3 years ago and there was a whole load of paperwork, health checks etc.
blaenkAug 17, 2010
Damn, this is really showing how much a lot of people don't know about the current state of the immigration system. So many people who think it's such a 'black and white' issue that don't even know the specifics.
beatle42Aug 16, 2010
What about the illegal immigrants from elsewhere, are they cool as long as they don't at least look Mexican?
daimposterAug 16, 2010
there are many illegal immigrants from different countries and yet, because they come from eastern europe and are white they seem not to be in the discussion.
I live in Chicago where there is a large number of illegal polish people. Nobody talks about them....at least not politicians.
p.s. Many polish people rallied with the Latino population back around 2006 when most major cities had rallies regarding immigration reform.
gr8fuldaneAug 16, 2010
I'm assuming you are referring to Arizona. If they had hordes of Russians or Chinese flocking across their border, then yeah, they might not target just Mexicans. However, it would seem a little silly for them to be targeting others. Here where I live, there are many illegal Russians and Polish as well as Mexicans. ICE does indeed target them specifically as well. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
daimposterAug 16, 2010
gr8fuldane: you make a valid point but you are referring to just ICE. Politicians, pundits and the right wing citizens seem to overlook polish, russians, albanians, ukranian, etc. Mexicans, Guatemalans, etc are the target and I'm sure that has a lot to do with them being brown.
Before anyone goes and says "well, mexicans make up about 1/2 the illegals" the why do people have the same view towards south americans but not european illegals?
immuneAug 17, 2010
@daimposter
Look, I'm no racist and I'm no f**king bigot but having experienced Mexico first hand I can tell you that their country is full of poverty, violence, STD's, and hard drugs.
The difference is if you go to Canada or Poland or Russia or Czechoslovakia you don't see this on such a large scale.
It's not that their brown. It's because they are POOR. And as we have all seen with US Ghettos and mexico's current condition poverty just brings all of the negative things that I listed above.
I don't want that kind of people flooding into our country.
Illegal immagration is wrong in almost all cases but bringing more unwanted poverty on top of that is wronger.
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
rburrowsAug 17, 2010
@Immune
I agree that Mexico's problems are the result of social and economic problems/abuses, not race. I disagree that it is America's duty to keep all the poor people out. I am confident America is proud of the Statue of Liberty, on which is famously inscribed:
Give me your tired, your poor
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free
We should work to filter out dangerous criminals, but welcoming poor people is part of being the Land of Opportunity.
daimposterAug 16, 2010
what paper work? all the italians and irish people who immigrated here in the 19th century and early 20th century were free to come here. they were accepted. all they did was fill out a simple form.
today, it takes years to even get accepted, if the immigrant is accepted at all. The only exception is the highly educated immigrant who has a company vouch for their work visa. It's completely different than 100 years ago.
UphemismAug 16, 2010
"It's completely different than 100 years ago."
As all things are, but the point is that they did it the legal way back then didn't they? You may say it wasn't as hard, and you'd be right, but you can't say they did it illegally - which is what they are doing now.
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
spinningheadAug 16, 2010
"As all things are, but the point is that they did it the legal way back then didn't they?"
Um, yes, when the "legal way" just meant you step off the boat.
daimposterAug 16, 2010
@ uphenism: yes, things change and that's exactly my point. apples and oranges. you can't make the same comparison.
babar77Aug 16, 2010
So you're just arguing the law. I once heard a saying.. sorta like this:
When the facts are on your side, you argue facts.
When the facts aren't on your side, you argue the law.
Seriously, there should be an equivalent to Godwin's law for debates about social policy and law. Should be something along the lines of, "The moment someone argues the law in a debate about social policy or facts, they lose the argument." Laws are meant to codify policy, not *be* the policy. If a policy the law codifies is wrong, we are supposed to change the damn law. Therefore, arguing that something is legal or illegal has no place in a debate about policy.
rburrowsAug 16, 2010
Many European immigrants would have come illegally if it was as hard as it is today. Besides the unreachable requirements, many immigrants have to wait for decades before they're approved to enter. Many immigrants want to come legally, but the current legal process isn't reasonable.
Better hope you're not from Mexico or the Philippines. You could have filed for immigration in 1989 and be waiting still.
http://archive.deseretnews.com/article/700049081/Long-immigration-waits-show-why-some-come-illegally.html
Maybe your grandfather might have died before he was granted entry, or maybe he would just be denied outright for not having enough savings. Today's process is only helps if you're wealthy or highly educated, and maybe if a relative is already here.
mackavelli3Aug 16, 2010
Did you think they were running across the border through rivers and deserts just to avoid paper work?
rburrowsAug 16, 2010
Why would immigrants 100 years ago care to avoid the paperwork? It was trivial. Today's illegal immigrants would LOVE to have the same conditions our ancestors enjoyed.
If I were a Mexican desperately seeking to improve my station, I would know there is only a border that separates criminal-chaos/poverty with stability/opportunity. I would probably try to sneak across the border since legal immigration is effectively unavailable to me. If I have to wait 15 years, it's just not a viable solution for my problems.
ghostalkerAug 16, 2010
We need something like Ellis Island along the Mexican border.
Closed AccountAug 17, 2010
I'm sure if it were possible for them to do that they would, but it's not.
Closed AccountAug 17, 2010
America is strange on illegal immigration, over here in Australia, come here illegally you got locked up. till we decided what to do with you. though, it makes it easier with our country being an island. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountAug 18, 2010
digg me down all you want but that's what happens.
danconiaAug 17, 2010
Your grandfather didn't have to go through nearly as much paperwork and waiting lines as they do today...
zirchxworldAug 17, 2010
because people totally spend 9 years just waiting in lines..
/dunce.
buzamanAug 16, 2010
This cartoon is seeking to falsely draw a parallel with the current situation and the settlers to the New/Old World, but leaves off the fact that in western culture brown people with funny hats don't matter.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
farbooAug 17, 2010
Actually it was the other way around in 1620: brown people who don't wear hats don't matter.
ferrisnoxAug 16, 2010
It seems like your forgetting Manifest Destiny... it was the will of God that us decent white folks take the land from the heathen natives.
Of course I don't actually believe that... but its the official story.
zenmojoAug 16, 2010
Reconquistadores anyone?
Just saying.
korvan504521Aug 16, 2010
Although most of the land was pretty empty when the English started settling anyway. Many of the initial colonies were in the same location as previous native villages. The epidemics the spanish accidentally brought over had wiped out a very significant portion of the population.
mykonos08Aug 16, 2010
wow, there still pulling that whole immigrant vs colonist comparison? I'm not even gonna bother...
crispixkingdomAug 16, 2010
Oh but you did!
codyjohnleAug 17, 2010
mykonos08, no please... bother. please.
xpinchxAug 16, 2010
These comments suck.
sh4rkb1t3Aug 16, 2010
Yeah, except the mexicans did it illegally.
pintomp3Aug 16, 2010
So the Europeans who came here got legal permission to commit genocide and steal land?
zomgflamerAug 16, 2010
Yes.
We also gave them AIDS.
glassagateAug 16, 2010
No, it was small pox.
glassagateAug 16, 2010
People argue that since there was no system of law, at least
something that the settlers recognized, that what they did
wasn't illegal.
jonp63Aug 16, 2010
Shut up and give your land to a native American family if you really care. Or better yet, LEAVE if we are such an awful country.
elisevilleAug 17, 2010
GlassAgate, one thing Europeans knew for sure, if you sleep in the blankets or wear the clothes that someone else died of the pox in, you were darn sure likely to get it too. Why else would they always burn all that valuable fabric? It was plenty intentional.
A little real history never kills like small pox.
joepythonAug 16, 2010
So, let's see -- I would guess that this cartoon is an analogy for our current situation with the "indians" representing modern U.S. Americans and the "pilgrims" representing modern illegal immigrants.
So, given what we know about the outcome of that conflict, I guess this cartoon is meant as a cautionary illustration about the dangers of unchecked immigration. Well done!
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountAug 17, 2010
So you're saying the America that resulted is a bad thing?
joepythonAug 18, 2010
Obviously it depends upon your point of view. For the native culture of that time, it was devastating.
ultar6Aug 17, 2010
There's another interpretation.
The people who came from Europe to North America were terrorists who systematically destroyed the Native American way of life through war, murder, deception, and any other backhanded tactics they could come up with.
For the anti-immigrant front, the lyrics "This land is your land, this land is my land" should be changed to "This land is my land, this land is my land". And by "my" they mean people with the appropriate political affiliations.
xsecretfilesAug 16, 2010
Hey now! The first settles were just doing the work Indians wouldn't do..mostly because they were too busy dying from diseases introduced by Europeans..
juliusthecatAug 16, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
nugz85Aug 16, 2010
Me too, I swore I saw that on the Daily Show. Deja vu, right?
SneedFIFAug 16, 2010
Buried for not being funny.
ultar6Aug 17, 2010
I don't think it was meant to be funny. I think it was meant to draw attention to hypocrisy.
gwhenningAug 16, 2010
Let's not forget that in some of the Southern states that land used to belong to Mexico. Probably why they have such a high concentration of latino immigrants.
So basically, we took the land, told them to get out and stay out. They're crawling back over the border to better themselves and we call what they're doing illegal. /s
trevor98Aug 16, 2010
Or, immigrants to Texans and Californians declared independence (and fought for it) and then annexed themselves to the US. That worked out well for Mexico and we should allow the same thing to happen?
jjuanml22Aug 16, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
jshhmrAug 17, 2010
You need a history lesson. How the f**k do you get dugg? Research the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo. Mexico SOLD the land to us.
jshhmrAug 17, 2010
Ahhh....buried for facts. Typical. Do you guys really ignore history? That sounds like the neo-cons you actively bury.
greggermAug 16, 2010
The Native American health care system *was* quite a bit better than the European one, so I can see why the colonists would want to come over and have babies born on North American soil to give their children all the same benefits and privileges a true Native American would have... not to mention all the other social benefits the Native Americans were giving out to its citizens.
Uh huh. Right.
hetmanAug 16, 2010
They should of but the f**ked it up.
Indian Chief Two Eagles was asked by a U.S. government official, "you have observed the white man for 90 years. You've seen his wars and his technological advances. You've seen his progress and the damage he has done" The Chief nodded in agreement. The official continued, "considering all these events, in your opinion where did the white man go wrong? The Chief stared at the government official fo some time and then calmly replied: "When white man find land, Indians running it, no taxes, nodept, plenty buffalo, plenty beaver, clean water, Women did all work, Medicine man free, Indian man spend all day hunting and fishing; all night having sex." Then the Chief leaned back and smiled "Only white man dumb enough to think he could improve system like that."
korvan504521Aug 16, 2010
good joke.
However the chief left out the whole starving to death in the winter aspect. Also, I'm not too in favor of my neighbors chopping my hair off either.
And I'd really rather have today's job options (as crappy as they are) vs the choice of Hunter or Medicine man.
hetmanAug 17, 2010
What people are the ones who started scalping. It was not natives. The government put out bounties on native americans head. So for every scalp you brought the government your recieved x amount of money.
drmangrumAug 16, 2010
Newsflash to liberals:
There was no "country" in 1620.
There were no immigration laws in 1620.
The whole concept of immigration in 1620 is nothing like today, if it existed at all.
It's not right that someone can cross the border, fly in for a vacation, come here on a work visa, etc, drop a baby and then have a citizenship by proxy when there are millions of people trying to get into the country by following the legal process.
The 14th amendment is being raped by the status quo. It was intended to insure freed slaves received citizenship status, not so people from other countries could skip the immigration process altogether.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
vegetablelambAug 16, 2010
So did a big illegal immigrant kick sand in your face at the beach or something?
drmangrumAug 16, 2010
What a stupid comment, it shows your complete and utter lack of comprehension of the topic. But, judging by your comment history, it's your modus operandi to comment without knowledge.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
vegetablelambAug 16, 2010
keep the fires of hatred burning!
pintomp3Aug 16, 2010
Yeah, we didn't bother with immigration laws until non-whites started showing up in droves.
drmangrumAug 16, 2010
You do know that immigration was a hot topic when Italians, Irish, and several other Europeans started to immigrate in droves right? The Irish had a particularly tough environment.
pintomp3Aug 16, 2010
But we didn't make laws to prevent their arrival like we did with the Chinese:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclusion_Act
tr3mulantAug 16, 2010
There is no citizenship by proxy. The child is automatically a citizen, yes, but the parents can, and do, get deported. So chillax my friend.
hetmanAug 16, 2010
There was a country here. White people just ignored them and treated them like subhumans. You know you can have a country with out white people running it.
13point1Aug 17, 2010
I stopped reading at "liberals" because your use of that word as some sort of epithet announced that you were an ignorant piece of human garbage. Then I read on and noticed that you're telling blatant lies again. Why is it that you adopt positions that are indefensible except by lying?
cowboy1015Aug 16, 2010
Terror Babies!
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
I love the Left. Progressives are awesome.
They look at what mass migration by white Europeans did to native american (Indian) populations and cultures and think that it makes a good argument for mass migration from the third world.
'Liberals', cause someone has to listen to the MSM.
pintomp3Aug 16, 2010
It wasn't mass migration, it was genocide. Are you saying the people coming across the border are coming to commit genocide?
Closed AccountAug 17, 2010
There are multiple reasons people are against illegal immigrants, one of the main ones is economic/financial, and another is simply xenophobia. The latter sees immigration as a kind of invasion. So it should be pointed out that our ancestors invaded North America and claimed it as their own, which makes Mexican immigrants pouring over the border look harmless.
ultar6Aug 17, 2010
No, they don't. They look at what European migrants and their descendants did to the Native American populations and see the irony and hypocrisy of the conservative position.
Essentially, it was OK for white Europeans to come in and decimate the native population through war, murder, starvation, assimilation and forced relocation, but how dare any brown-skinned person show up in the U.S. and have a child.
Even though the brown-skinned parents do not become citizens and are NOT guaranteed a place in this country just because they birthed a child here, the ethnic-phobic conservatives must latch onto it and declare that some of these babies are TERROR BABIES who will one day be BENT ON DESTROYING THE U.S. FROM WITHIN.
They do so without proof and use the argument as a scare tactic. Case in point - Gomer hasn't named the names of any source, though he feels it's A-OK to assert these unfounded claims on the floor of the House.
jmrocketAug 16, 2010
The natives lost, you won. Defend your country, damn it.
michelefloydAug 16, 2010
This feels strange and uncomfortable but I agree with you. Part of me carries the guilt of destroying the native people of the Americas, yet I have a very strong proven connection to American Indians. There's no middle ground on this issue, unfortunately, so I think you speak the truth. If you want to stay the dominant people in a rich land, you had damn well defend it.
By the way, I have no dog in this fight as I don't live on American soil.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
tdh246357Aug 16, 2010
You didn't destroy them though. You're just claiming their destruction. They still exist, and a lot of Mexicans have Native American blood. You're just declaring them dead even though they're still here on the continent and having "anchor" babies or just babies if they were born in the US.
michelefloydAug 17, 2010
I didn't say eradicated, I said destroyed - by disease, starvation, murder, drugs, etc. Why do you think Mexicans are pouring into one of the two "white" countries, because it's so great back home?
hetmanAug 16, 2010
You call it winning I c all it genocide.
coryjseamanAug 16, 2010
Whatever it was, we are where we are today. You need not be proud of the route we took to get here, but if you feel shame at being an American because of it, or any of the other real or perceived mistakes made in the founding of our great nation, well...that's really unfortunate. In case you don't hear it from anyone else--it's not your fault. Let it go and try to muster up some love for your country.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
oboshoeAug 16, 2010
Not really.
It wasn't legal manuevers. What little there was of a legal system in North America was what the colonist brought with them
It was weapon technology. bows and arrows were no match against firearms.
zenmojoAug 16, 2010
And smallpox. And syphilis. And iron.
Guns, Germs, and Steel is a good book.
frumblerAug 16, 2010
Syphilis was a gift from the Indians to Europe, although there is some debate if a milder version existed in the old world before Columbus.
eh123Aug 16, 2010
We should open our borders completely because of something that happened 400 years ago.
pgiesselAug 16, 2010
Incorrect, this was the "anchor baby" of the 1620s:
http://www.google.com/search?q=revolutionary+war+musket
farbooAug 17, 2010
You're off by 150 years.
cptbuckAug 16, 2010
Am I the only one who thought this wasn't funny because it didn't make any sense?
indigo2Aug 16, 2010
Yup!
ieatskunkAug 17, 2010
No.
needcoffeeAug 17, 2010
yup, what is an anchor baby.
guitmusic11Aug 16, 2010
But but but... they're white!
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
Anchor Babies is just a red herring (like American flag lapel pins) to keep voters from focusing on the economy, which isn't a winner topic for either party.
BTW: I laugh at the flag lapel pin debate. Wearing the flag goes against the flag code (United States Flag Code), which any true patriot should know, so basically all the Fox and friends, me-too politicians are promoting desecration.
The proposed 14th Amendment change is election-year silliness and I hope even the dimmest of the right wing voters can see through this sham and force the debate back to the economy.
nickdotnetAug 16, 2010
"Which any true patriot knows"......
You just completely made yourself look like an idiot. Per the flag code:
"The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery."
Meaning wearing an actual flag itself, not a replica. And as far as wearing a flag pin, the flag code says this:
"No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform. However, a flag patch may be affixed to the uniform of military personnel, firemen, policemen, and members of patriotic organizations. The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living thing. Therefore, the lapel flag pin being a replica, should be worn on the left lapel near the heart."
- United States Code Title 4 Chapter 1 Section 8
Do some f**king research before you spout off rumors that you here. I laugh at your inability to google.
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
Looks like you are right if you consider a political party a "patriotic organization", which it most certainly is.
Of course, you are dead wrong on this:
"Meaning wearing an actual flag itself, not a replica."
The words ''flag, standard, colors, or ensign'', as used herein, shall include any flag, standard, colors, ensign, or any picture or representation of either, or of any part or parts of either, made of any substance or represented on any substance, of any size evidently purporting to be either of said flag, standard, colors, or ensign of the United States of America or a picture or a representation of either, upon which shall be shown the colors, the stars and the stripes, in any number of either thereof, or of any part or parts of either, by which the average person seeing the same without deliberation may believe the same to represent the flag, colors, standard, or ensign of the United States of America.
In short, anything that looks like the american flag should be considered an american flag and be treated accordingly.
I'm man enough to say I was wrong about the pin (though I'm right about t-shirts, ties, belt buckles, bikinis, table-cloths, etc), but now it is I who laughs at your inability to Google properly. Maybe you should also do some f**king research my fellow idiot.
ha ha ha. one of us. one of us.
zenmojoAug 16, 2010
I burned a flag once. It touched the ground. I wasn't just going to hang it back up like some f**king idiot who has no idea how to treat the flag.
coryjseamanAug 16, 2010
So we can't let illegal immigrants do to us what we did to the Native Americans. Point taken!
zenmojoAug 16, 2010
And by us we mean White English people.
coryjseamanAug 17, 2010
No, by us I think the artist means Americans. The epitome of race baiting is all of these sad attempts to marginalize anti-illegal immigration perspectives as white supremacy. The people who oppose illegal immigration certainly don't oppose immigrants, NOR a particular nationality. They are concerned for America's safety, and the unsustainability of a system that can't continue to support the constant influx of people who draw more from the system than they contribute to it. "Give us your poor..." or anyone else who wants to come, surely, but let them come legally. Please, present a rational argument against that logic.
chahrlie5Aug 16, 2010
This comic doesn't convey its intended message as well as the artist perhaps originally thought it would.
cclydeAug 16, 2010
@Uphemism: The reasons so many illegals can't fill out the same paperwork as legal ones are several, but a big one is quotas. For a potential immigrant in many countries without an immediate family member legally in the U.S. willing to sponsor them, they'd be better off playing the lottery.
gokingsAug 16, 2010
For the love of f**k can we stop comparing the 1600's to today? What did we do to the Native Americans? We raped, pillaged, gave them disease, and took all their land. What did the Native Americans do? They tried to stop us of course.
Am I saying that people from Mexico are looking to do what we did to the Native Americans? Absolutely not. But that's another reason why this comparison is stupid. But also, what's so wrong with protecting your land and borders? Just because we took over from the Native Americans doesn't mean now almost 400 years later we can be like "Oh well we raped and pillaged so come on down!"
jonp63Aug 16, 2010
You may have raped, pillaged etc. I didn't.
glassagateAug 16, 2010
"Nobody give you America, you keep it, until someone takes it away from you."
"You want your country back? Tell that to the Indians."
jonp63Aug 16, 2010
If you REALLY cared about us taking the land from the Native Americans, then you would go down to the nearest reservation and find a needy family and give them the note to your land and home free and clear. No wait, you are liberals, it is much easier to whine about it and take other peoples money and give it away. Self righteous hypocrites.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
joannchiladaAug 17, 2010
I don't understand this hatred, or extreme dislike, for immigration into the US. Unless you're 100% Native American, if you live in the US, you or someone in your family immigrated here, with varying levels of legality. You certainly wouldn't wish that your relative were "sent back home," so SFTU.
13point1Aug 17, 2010
It's not immigration that the right wing is against; it's the national complexion getting less pasty white. Notice how they're not shrieking about the evil illegal Irish and Swedish immigrants who are going to ruin our country; it's the nasty brown-skinned people from the south.
joannchiladaAug 17, 2010
Brown is the new white. Americans used to be very anti-Irish - in the not too distant past.
ieatskunkAug 17, 2010
No one has a problem with immigrants. It is illegal immigrants we have a problem with. It doesn't matter what color their skin is. If they came here illegally then they said f**k YOU to everyone waiting in line to come legitimately. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
13point1Aug 17, 2010
And they couldn't possibly have a reason (like trying to escape desperate poverty or a target painted on their backs by local gang members) that merits our sympathy rather than our hatred.
deathtaxesnolesAug 17, 2010
Pilgrim baby will grow up working for living.
sndreamAug 17, 2010
The huge amount of anchor babies back in 1620 spelled the doom of native American.
Closed AccountAug 17, 2010
Cute joke but we know there is a difference. It's the year 2010 not 1620. And most Americans today do not descend from the original Pilgrims. Almost all of us descend from people who went through Ellis Island and similar immigration stations. I support healthy immigration but this comparison of pilgrims/indians vs mexican/americans is stupid and metaphorically and historically inaccurate. Pilgrims did not just walk into the American continent. They came in begging for for help from the indians, without whom the first settlers would have starved and/or frozen to death. Pilgrim numbers were small at first so the Indians did not mind sharing resources. Much like our original immigration policy with mexico. When pilgrim numbers started growing exponentially and using up to many resources the indians tried to enforce there dominion over there lands. Much like what whats happening today.Their really is a legitimate reason why we have an immigration process. Its broken and needs to be fixed but its tons better than the anarchy of an open border
mtjohnsonAug 17, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
ieatskunkAug 17, 2010
Still hiding behind the "we're all immigrants" argument?
I'm afraid you've brought an Uno deck to a poker game.
mtjohnsonAug 17, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
ricoduedAug 17, 2010
I'm sure there are many museums along our southern border.
Closed AccountAug 17, 2010
Our grand parents and great grand parents went through hell going through Ellis island. Spending more than a month cramped in the bottem of a cargo boat. Then waiting endlessly for papers to be at Ellis island for papers to be processed, to be approved of physically and mentally. And after a few standard bribes they were able to enter America. They then spent the next few years living in a small cellar while working 14 hours a day. Finally they get enough money to bring the rest of the family over and pray to God they don't get tuned back for medical reasons. Upon there arrival, every member of the family regardless of age was put to work for many many hours in very dangorous conditions. Our slow and steady immigration system, though broken, is way more humane than the expediate Ellis Island. Its designed so that immigrants can succefully and safely become assimilated into American society. And yes we only accept the rich and/or educated because we're not gonna give citizenship to just anyone.
trentshippAug 17, 2010
Kinda hard for the European immigrants to be illegal when there was no legal system for immigration. Martial immigrants perhaps?
uniiAug 17, 2010
Buried because two wrongs don't make a right and its not just white people who now are American citizens who feel the 'anchor baby' loophole should be changed.
infinitysnatchAug 17, 2010
Yeah, we know it's true, but this same point has been made a million times. Jokes like these write themselves.
jakaldxAug 17, 2010
I just don't see how we're supposed to handle an unchecked influx of illegal immigrants. I can understand their situation, and it's horrible that some of them are forced into the situation they are in by birth, but unemployment is already sky high, or economy is horrendous, and our schools are already overcrowded. I don't see what argument could be made for "f**k it, let 'em all in."
bracomadarAug 17, 2010
Well, if you really believed free market, you'd understand that more people = more demand for goods and services. More demand for goods and services = more jobs. More jobs = less unemployment.
prisoner24601Aug 17, 2010
I'm honestly baffled to see so many "lol Republicans and their bizzare desire to stop illegal immigration, they r so racist" comments.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/12/us/12babies.html
"8 percent of babies born in the United States in 2008 had at least one parent who was an illegal immigrant, had at least one parent who was an illegal immigrant"
"Children of illegal immigrants make up 7 percent of all people in the country younger than 18 years old"
Why is it strange to think maybe it no longer makes sense to give someone citizenship just because they happen to be here when they are born? Is there any major nation that does? If you and your wife were travelling in Mexico and she happened to go into early labor, would your child be given Mexican citizenship? Is there any reason why you would expect that to happen?