Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
The Amplifier
7745 Followers
Jon Edward Santillan
471 Followers
Mariam Williams
1231 Followers
Mariam Williams
1231 Followers
Belhassen Ben Smail
1172 Followers
Belhassen Ben Smail
1172 Followers
executexAug 15, 2010
I think even US-born US citizens with US parents take this country for granted. Ideally, I'd like it if all citizens were to take some sort of citizenship test or at least educated extensively about world events and other countries... Then they would appreciate the US more.
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
Left Wing Argument against the 2nd Amendment: Our forefathers never dreamed of a country where a handgun or rifle could fire hundreds of rounds out of a weapon therefore the 2A should be redefined..
Right Wing goes apes**t...
Right Wing Argument against the 14th Amendment: Our forefathers never dreamed that people could easily travel from all over the world and have babies here therefore the 14A should be redefined...
Left Wing goes apes**t...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
rizzosbackAug 16, 2010
There's no technological issue in the 14th Amendment, the argument is over mexicans who hop fences and have babies, that's basically a process unchanged for 250 years, so your argument makes absolutely no sense.
nanan00Aug 16, 2010
A simple solution is to put the child into an orphanage and boot the parents as they have no legal rights to stay.
diggrageAug 16, 2010
@nanan00 Can you please describe what the border between the USA and Mexico looked like in 1800?
diggrageAug 16, 2010
Actually, my previous messages was @RizzosBack, sorry.
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
You can't fly here on visa and have a baby?
jeemboAug 16, 2010
They usually take a citizenship test in a high school civics class. However, good luck getting high school kids to appreciate s**t.
guytorontoAug 16, 2010
"I think even US-born US citizens with US parents take this country for granted."
A country is its people. Without people, their is no country. If a person of your country has "freedom", then they can behave however they wish within the limitations of the law.
You say "I'd like it if all citizens were to take some sort of citizenship test" and what? If they don't pass, they are no longer citizens? What do you do with them? You can't really export them to another country. Maybe you could lock them up. Execution?
"or at least educated extensively about world events and other countries". - You've swung from one extreme to the other. So all citizens need to either a)know everything about their country to pass a citizenship test - or b) know everything about world events and other countries. That doesn't really leave a lot to not know.
"Then they would appreciate the US more" - appreciate it for what? Forced appreciation is not real.
And what if they don't want to "appreciate" it? Do they lose their citizenship? And what are they appreciating? The Government?
Ahhh..."appreciate" your Country (Government). Sounds like things would be a lot better/happier/easier if you had a one-party Government. Nothing makes controlling the people easier than a dictatorship.
smacksawAug 15, 2010
Yes, but we made the laws to make ourselves legal, so it's ok. And then we made laws that let some other people be legal, but not others. And even though the intent is the same, it's no longer ok. So let's change the laws so that no one can have what we had. It was right for us, but it's wrong when THEY do it.
beratebirthersAug 16, 2010
"It was right for us, but it's wrong when THEY do it."
Welcome to the GOP's fiscal argument as well.
thegreat0neAug 16, 2010
Unfortunately, it would currently be devastating to the US economy to open our borders. And it would similarly be devastating to any economy that provides guaranteed welfare benefits to everyone in the country that needs them. No country with social programs can have open borders (provided that people want to come in). In addition due to minimum wage laws an influx in unskilled workers would result in massive unemployment, meaning heavy poverty and crime.
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
slavery helped build this country and we abloished it because it was wrong.
now with this current immigration mess we have what equates to modern day slavery. people brought here either became low wage slaves or actual slaves to the people that brough them.
sorry, when things are wrong we change them. and to justify supporting modern day slavery with the "they did it so we should be able to" bulls**t is pathetic.
thehofstetterAug 15, 2010
First Italians, Slavs, and the Irish, and now Mexicans. I wonder, once we finally accept Mexican immigrants as part of our country, who we get to be prejudiced against next.
manstein01Aug 16, 2010
Almost everyone accepts Mexican immigrants as part of the country, I haven't seen any group who wants to shut off immigration completely. It's ILLEGAL immigrants that are causing so much anger.
rizzosbackAug 16, 2010
Then explain to me how a Mexican without an advanced degree can legally enter the US and eventually attain citizenship.
barrettandersonAug 16, 2010
RizzosBack: I'm from southern california. I know many first and second generation mexican immigrants (they made up roughly half of my high school). Most of them came here legally. Only about 10% of them (or their parents) had an advanced degree of any kind.
rpatrick819Aug 16, 2010
@Rizzo - By waiting. Saying "oh well that takes too long they shouldn't have to wait" is like me saying "gee, I wasn't born with any money, so it's ok if I steal a bunch instead of working and saving up."
Yes, the process is long, can be denied and you have to reapply, etc...but it CAN be done. I agree the process needs streamlined, but ONLY with actual enforcement, as well. Or maybe you didn't realize that most people that are so outspoken against illegal immigration are that way because we know that's the only start towards REAL immigration reform where they can come over more easily.
doctechnicalAug 16, 2010
"Then explain to me how a Mexican without an advanced degree can legally enter the US and eventually attain citizenship. "
Explain to me why a Mexican has any expectation of American citizenship whatsoever.
hetmanAug 16, 2010
Blame Canadadians with there beady eyes and there flapping heads so full of lie.
skurtAug 16, 2010
There were no Immigrations laws when the Italians came here, the Slaves were 'property' and they didn't officially immigrate (hence the 14th amendment) The Irish LEGALLY immigrated here.
The Mexicans?
ILLEGAL
what part of Illegal don't you understand?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
salbatrossAug 16, 2010
You don't know who the Slavs are, do you?
e2thexAug 16, 2010
What Part of Legal Immigration Don’t You Understand?
http://i.imgur.com/VG2cb.jpg
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
Mexicans are bad because they immigrate here illegally. Why is it illegal for them to immigrate here? Because they're bad. f**king circular logic for the win!
Seriously, you know someone's a f**king racist when the best they can offer is "it's the law." You can't say why it should be illegal for Mexicans to come here, you don't defend that, you just saw that's the law and that makes it above question, because you can't f**king admit that you just can't stand brown people who talk with an accent.
thehofstetterAug 17, 2010
Um, no the SlavEs were property. The Slavs were people from Slavic countries.
Your whole argument has been defeated by your unwillingness (or inability) to read.
whomodAug 16, 2010
BINGO!
Spot on! It's remarkable that the people of the continent from way across the Atlantic ocean act as if they're the indigenous people of THIS continent.
But then again, they've been acting as if this was theirs all along. Manifest Destiny it was called. They thought it was rightfully theirs even before they ever saw, much less ever got to the furthest point west. And all those brown people who were already there were just mere inconveniences to be killed off and/or be relocated.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
which is exactly why we should protect our borders, just ask those "brown people" how their border security worked out for them.....
skurtAug 16, 2010
Yeah, those damn Indians crossing the ocean and landing in America...
hell they walked across the Bering strait, they deserve to be here before us!
Spot on indeed!
dbialacAug 16, 2010
Yeah, except that even then there was immigration law. You weren't allowed to just grab a boat and come over, you had to get permission from the King of England to establish a colony. Though set up on the European side and not the North American side, it was thereComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
tenaciousg86Aug 16, 2010
http://rorr.im
monkeysmasherAug 16, 2010
grassyass
visionviperAug 16, 2010
http://rorr.im/digg.com/political_opinion/the_original_anchor_babies/
snoogsAug 16, 2010
Thanks- for whatever reason when I go to rror.im, it gets blocked, but when I go direct it works fine.... that means I can't get the damn mirror for myself.
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
This cartoon has a lesson behind it. Just ask an American Indian about border security and how theirs failed.
rizzosbackAug 16, 2010
I'm not sure what your position is on this issue, but it sounds like you think illegal mexicans are going to commit genocide against America, which is about as retarded as anything else I've heard on the right lately.
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
Rizzo -
The Europeans raped and pillaged the American Indians. Gave them firewater. Enslaved the Indians and turned their women into prostitutes.
Are you telling me the Mexicans aren't doing, by definition, the same thing?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15984485/
http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/International/story?id=1477964
InfinityComplexAug 16, 2010
Oh those Mexicans, coming over here with all their advanced Mexican technology...
skippydoorknobAug 16, 2010
http://www.hightechburrito.com/
misterbadideaAug 16, 2010
While it makes a good one-liner, I find myself not terribly impressed by this cartoon. Suffice to say that the socio-political realities of the 17th century are a bit different than that of the present day.
Which isn't to say that I think the "anchor babies" controversy has any merit, just that I think there are better arguments against it.
juliusthecatAug 16, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
Baby Popeye and Friends
balancedAug 16, 2010
I'm thinking a bunch of little kid versions of various big-name 80's news anchors. maybe let Cronkite cameo as the teen who has to babysit them?
snaxieAug 16, 2010
Boom! A check falls in my lap and -- I'm a producer!
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
Yes, let's compare immigration policies of 2010 with 1492. That sure makes a lot of sense.
salbatrossAug 16, 2010
*1620
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
Oops. Well, only 128 years off...
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
11 buries so far and no replies?
See, here's what I don't get. Hundreds of years ago, our ancestors came to this land and basically invaded it by force. I'm sure it was horrible for the Natives and I wouldn't wish what happened to them on my worst enemy.
But why should we, a country full of people who are generations removed from these awful acts, bear any guilt for what happened? And why should we say "Well, our ancestors came here 'illegally,' so really we shouldn't point fingers at those who are crossing our borders 'illegally' today. That would be hypocritical!" That doesn't make any sense in the world we live in today.
unfriendlyfireAug 16, 2010
The point is invalid; there was no America or any other country at the time. The natives were nomads.
hetmanAug 16, 2010
All of them were not nomads. You cannot justify Genocide by just claiming America did not belong to anyone at the time.
jhourcleAug 16, 2010
And they didn't have a flag, either. They must not be a country, or so Eddie Izzard has told us:
We stole countries with the cunning use of flags. Just sail around the world and stick a flag in. "I claim India for Britain!" They're going "You can't claim us, we live here! Five hundred million of us!" "Do you have a flag …? "What? We don't need a flag, this is our home, you bastards" "No flag, No Country, You can't have one! Those are the rules... that I just made up!...and I'm backing it up with this gun, that was lent to me from the National Rifle Association."
sek82Aug 16, 2010
Actually most Native Americans were not nomads they were territorial and roamed mostly within their own lands.
rizzosbackAug 16, 2010
So non white people can't have countries is what you're saying? Not until white people taught them about it?
pfenixfireAug 16, 2010
I would consider myself to be fairly progressive, but I would have to say that being born on US soil should not automatically grant the baby citizenship. The only countries that do this are us and Canada. Every other industrialized country grants citizenship to children of current citizens.
With regard to children of illegal immigrants, others such as Britain give them citizenship only after being in the country for 10 years; realizing that if they have lived in the country that long they have only ever known lifethere and not the country of their parents.
pfenixfireAug 16, 2010
Couldn't find the source before. Here is the article in the NY Times by Yale Law Professor, Peter Schuck, that gets into the nuances of the 14th amendment and suggests this resolution to the problem. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/14/opinion/14schuck.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
chamroxAug 16, 2010
Millions of Anchor Babies... but only one can be the AnchorMAN!
/scotch
LosAlamosLabsAug 16, 2010
Oh, oh! Let me guess, it's a European settler with Native Americans looking on, right?
You can wish you had a fairy wand to wave the immigration laws away, but reality is, every nation in the industrialized world has immigration laws and for good reason.
Try breaking into Mexico and working there illegally and see how that works out for you, moonbeam.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
sek82Aug 16, 2010
It's just another blown up non-issue, given a catchy name so the uninformed can be more easily herded like the sheep they are.
nanan00Aug 16, 2010
Getting citizenship in the US isn't very hard, it will take time but you can get a work visa fairly easily. I know several people who are here in the US on work visa's on path to get citizenship in a few years.
bombayterrorAug 16, 2010
i agree. getting citizenship legally and by the books is a slow and long process. it can take upto 10-12 yrs years sometimes. + a lot of paperwork and various govt. fees. I am going through that right now and i can vouch for the fact sometimes illegals make us law following immigrants look bad.
itmovesAug 16, 2010
http://www.politicalcartoons.com/cartoon/ead5b4ec-a14c-4c7e-8d66-ac26a05b188c.html
spinningheadAug 16, 2010
That Palestinian fetus is clearly a terrorist sleeper baby.
orion846Aug 16, 2010
AMERRRRRRRKA!!!
groovydooAug 16, 2010
The 14th Amendment has been gamed, will continue to be gamed, and we will have to pay. (There was no safety net in the 1800s.) Also, your talking about an amendment that was written well before airplanes and automobiles. Currently it takes about 17-hours or less for a pregnant woman to come to the United States from just about anywhere in the world versus the weeks-and-weeks it took when the amendment was written.
cjays1Aug 16, 2010
If enough people think Section 1 of the 14th Amendment is outdated, we should just ignore it. We can justify ignoring it by claiming the "necessary and proper" clause outweighs an amendment added later. We can also use the the Commerce clause by claiming the 14th Amendment is irrelevant if an anchor baby's onesie came from across State lines. YET ANOTHER way to justify ignoring the 14th is to say the will of the majority outweighs the rights of the minority. See, there's no reason to modify the Constitution properly with an Amendment when there's so many other quicker avenues we can take.
/s
gnixon70Aug 16, 2010
Like I say whenever this stupid cartoon makes the rounds:
History is full of people conquering other people. It might not have been right the way it was done, but like it or not, this land belongs to the current occupants. I refuse to feel guilty for what happened centuries ago as it was not of my doing. Perhaps someone will conquer us and it will then be their land. Until then it belongs to us and people living here are subject to the laws of the country that currently occupies this land.