Russell Pearce, Enemy of the U.S. Constitution

• Sorry doesn't work that way: Plyler v. Doe summary: Texas was refusing to educate illegal children claiming they were not under the jurisdiction of the state of Texas since they were illegal: Texas View: Appellants argue at the outset that undocumented aliens, because of their immigration status, are not "persons within the jurisdiction" of the State of Texas, and that they therefore have no right to the equal protection of Texas law. SCOTUS View: We reject this argument. Whatever his status under the immigration laws, an alien is surely a "person" in any ordinary sense of that term. Aliens, even aliens whose presence in this country is unlawful, have long been recognized as "persons" guaranteed due process of law by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. In concluding that "all persons within the territory of the United States," including aliens unlawfully present, may invoke the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to challenge actions of the Federal Government, we reasoned from the understanding that the Fourteenth Amendment was designed to afford its protection to all within the boundaries of a State. Senator Howard: The last two clauses of the first section of the amendment disable a State from depriving not merely a citizen of the United States, but any person, whoever he may be, of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, or from denying to him the equal protection of the laws of the State. This abolishes all class legislation in the States and does away with the injustice of subjecting one caste of persons to a code not applicable to another. . . . It will, if adopted by the States, forever disable every one of them from passing laws trenching upon those fundamental rights and privileges which pertain to citizens of the United States, and to all person who may happen to be within their jurisdiction. SCOTUS: Use of the phrase "within its jurisdiction" thus does not detract from, but rather confirms, the understanding that the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment extends to anyone, citizen or stranger, who is subject to the laws of a State, and reaches into every corner of a State's territory. That a person's initial entry into a State, or into the United States, was unlawful, and that he may for that reason be expelled, cannot negate the simple fact of his presence within the State's territorial perimeter. Given such presence, he is subject to the full range of obligations imposed by the State's civil and criminal laws. And until he leaves the jurisdiction -- either voluntarily, or involuntarily in accordance with the Constitution and laws of the United States -- he is entitled to the equal protection of the laws that a State may choose to establish. SCOTUS goes onto say: Sheer incapability or lax enforcement of the laws barring entry into this country, coupled with the failure to establish an effective bar to the employment of undocumented aliens, has resulted in the creation of a substantial "shadow population" of illegal migrants -- numbering in the millions -- within our borders. [n17] This situation raises the specter of a permanent [p219] caste of undocumented resident aliens, encouraged by some to remain here as a source of cheap labor, but nevertheless denied the benefits that our society makes available to citizens and lawful residents. [n18] The existence of such an underclass presents most difficult problems for a Nation that prides itself on adherence to principles of equality under law. [n19] The children who are plaintiffs in these cases are special members of this underclass. Persuasive arguments support the view that a State may withhold its beneficence from those whose very presence within the United States is the product of their own unlawful conduct. These arguments do not apply [p220] with the same force to classifications imposing disabilities on the minor children of such illegal entrants. At the least, those who elect to enter our territory by stealth and in violation of our law should be prepared to bear the consequences, including, but not limited to, deportation. But the children of those illegal entrants are not comparably situated. Their "parents have the ability to conform their conduct to societal norms," and presumably the ability to remove themselves from the State's jurisdiction; but the children who are plaintiffs in these cases "can affect neither their parents' conduct nor their own status." Trimble v. Gordon, 430 U.S. 762, 770 (1977). Even if the State found it expedient to control the conduct of adults by acting against their children, legislation directing the onus of a parent's misconduct against his children does not comport with fundamental conceptions of justice. [V]isiting . . . condemnation on the head of an infant is illogical and unjust. Moreover, imposing disabilities on the . . . child is contrary to the basic concept of our system that legal burdens should bear some relationship to individual responsibility or wrongdoing. Obviously, no child is responsible for his birth, and penalizing the . . . child is an ineffectual -- as well as unjust -- way of deterring the parent.

• Nativist turned governor candidate for california Chelene Nightingale has some splainin to do at www.freeplumpervideos.com apparently she posed for porn pics and forgot to mention this to cp members that backed her. "We knew she was hiding stuff, but we had no idea she was a paid ho" comment from a former supporter. Nightingale should apologise for her sick past and give back the money she bilked to a failed campaign.

• @Tina - I've read tons of books on the Mtn Meadows Massacre - I have to thank you for mentioning these names here of James and Harrison Pearce because I hadn't heard of this connection to Russell Pearce; PLEASE (!!!) how did you come on to this info. this is earth-shaking to anyone researching the massacre. Amazing!!! Please tell us more!!!

• Yet, many of you guys claim that an 'illegal' immigrant is a criminal from the moment that he or she crosses the border...........

• Russell Pearce is an angry white man ( REPUBLICAN ) ,he don't like minority gropus ,REAL KKK

• Pearce is a slimball

• Tommy, sounds to me like Pearce is just like his buddy the Flaccid Fool of MCSO, who is a mentally ill old man, just like Pearce himself. Good luck Russell. What a waste of taxpayer time and money this fat fool is.

• Each generation has their ethnic group to fear. My mother's family immigrated from Ireland in the 30's. Her older brother, my Uncle, was so angry at the bigotry against him as an immigrant, being accused of stealing American jobs, lowering wages etc., that he joined the merchant marines. He loved America, but hated bigots. I should mention, that my grandfather was an illegal alien from Ireland...joined the Army in WWI, and when he was discharged after the war was deported to Ireland...he then immigrated back to the U.S. with his family in the 30s...and received full V.A. benefits for his service. He and many other Irish immigrants mistakenly thought if they joined the military they would be granted citizenship...recruiters lied even during World War I.

• Thank you for arguing that the children born of undocumented parents is a U.S. citizen and they are free to return to this country anytime. I'm glad to see someone on the "deport the parents" side is fully acknowledging that the 14th Amendment grants full citizenship to any child born here.

• http://Moreyunit.com/ Private Prison Economic Help Drive - SB1070 Click Here To LISTEN TO THE STORY Read More 18 days ago by Morey ControlBe the first to Comment! Prison Economics Help Drive Ariz. Immigration Law Laura Sullivan/NPR Glenn Nichols, city manager of Benson, Ariz., says two men came to the city last year "talking about building a facility to hold women and children that were illegals." text size A A A October 28, 2010 Last year, two men showed up in Benson, Ariz., a small deser... Read More 18 days ago by Morey Control

• Sorry Mark, but I'm pretty up on this stuff. Way more than you are, apparently. I don't suppose you ever considered that the reason food prices are going up is because they're not planting large crops anymore because they don't have the labor to bring them in? I don't suppose, in your vast reservoir of economic knowledge, you understand that when there is smaller supply to an increasing demand prices go up? No farmer is going to plant everywhere they can knowing a lot of it will go to waste at harvesting time. That's how to go OUT of business. "But crop pickers only make up 2% of our entire workforce. Most illegals aren't picking crops. They are taking construction jobs and other blue collar jobs that Americans have always done for a fair wage until the cheap, illegal labor came along." Okay, let's use your numbers (they're wrong). If "crop pickers make up 2% of our entire workforce," and undocumented workers make up 3% of people in the workforce, that means there is only an addition 1% of the jobs out there for the undocumented. So, that other 1% has to include restaurant workers, hotel workers, construction workers, landscapers, etc. My point is they're NOT taking American jobs to the extent you think they are. As I said before, if that was true (it isn't) then how come the unemployment rate continues to rise as they leave? After all, those jobs are now open, aren't' they? Maybe it's because there are other jobs that are dependent upon their being here as well and when they leave, those jobs leave. Don't argue economics if you don't understand economics.

• You are plainly and simply an ignorant buffoon. 1. "They just don't pay enough to cover their social costs." You presume that "they are at the poverty level" so they somehow get welfare and social security when you know (or should know, but you're ignorant) they are not FUCKING ELIGIBLE FOR WELFARE OR SOCIAL SECURITY. That is to say, they don't have access to "social programs." Actually, there are studies from respectable universities and the Congressional Research Service that shows they do pay in to the system more than they take out. I know being ignorant is hard work, but do try to read other things than racist blogs and words of people who think like you do (hint, they're ignorant too). 2. "If allowed to remain here and pay additional taxes they are at the poverty level with many dependaents so therefore they would pay literally no income taxes." You assume that they are all Catholic baby factories and they will all live in poverty and be drains on society, but you cannot provide any solid evidence of that whatsoever. If fact, studies (only referring to those from respected universities, not groups with axes to grind) show they are more upwardly mobile than you want to believe because they're driven to improve their lives. That's why their kids are in college. 3. "Americans need those jobs at a fair wage and their tax contributions would be much higher." You clearly have no idea how this works. It's only because they're undocumented that employers think they can pay them less. You assume (wrongly) that they're only paid less. That isn't true. By making them able to work legally, it raises everyone's wages because there is no longer an underground economy. That point shouldn't be hard to understand...unless you're ignorant. 4. "(M)y main objection is to rewarding illegal aliens with allowing them to remain here and what this does to our population growth and the added demands to our resources." I think your real issue is you don't like what it does to the growth of the Hispanic population (since it's clear Hispanics are "white"). The U.S. is barely at replacement birth level, which means we will need more immigrants to come here to work if we're to maintain any level of economic stability. So by arguing we should close the borders completely until your stupid fence is built without addressing the real economic issues is dooming the U.S. to second world status, which is what you must want, because that's the way the data shows we're headed. And there is NO confirmable proof ANYWHERE that immigrants are an "added demand to our resources." 5. "The last amnesty only encouraged 4 times the number of illegal aliens to jump our borders after that. When is enough, enough?" That's what happens when you don't address the problem and address only the symptoms--people figure out a way to get around the system and that causes other problems. But, we could have fixed this three years ago, but some clowns decided to scuttle the attempt by screaming "amnesty, amnesty" and killing the bill and the desire to solve the problem. That's YOUR FAULT. This is why I still say you're only interested in perpetuating the problem rather than solve it. 6. "You put illlegal foreigners above the well beiing of your own country and its citizens." This is why I know you're ignorant. You view disagreement as a lack of patriotism and I'm so far ahead of you in that regard it's laughable. Where I see solving the problem as a way of reducing tension, increasing economic growth on both sides of the border, making it easier for employers to find labor, increasing wages and reducing the need for immigrants to bring their families with them, allowing those here to obtain legal status (NOT citizenship with access to benefits) you see that as capitulating. Where your ignorance comes in is you can't see that solving the problem addresses every one of your concerns. Every one of them. Now solving the problem isn't hard, but your and Pearce's way ain't it. It's not even close. It only makes it worse.

• You are.

• Which is why he beat his wife...

• Russel Pearce is the biggest bag of shit there ever was.

• Hey Guys Ladies and gentelmen we should look into this BILDERBEG AGENDA (GOOGLE IT) it will suprise you. That mother fucker Pearce, Jan Brewer, and Joe Arpiayo, and amoung others are clicks involved... If you need more Information go to Moreyunit.com on how currupt and Racist that mother fucker is. I appoligize for being belligerent but it makes me so MAD that those Idiots are giving ARIZONA and the Citizens a Bad reputation Please look in to it, Remember Moreyuint.com under Prison economics help drive Arizona Immigration Law......... and another is Bilderberg Agenda...... Thanks and God Bless....

• True, though same can/should be said about the Republicans and Tea Baggers.<br>Undocumented workers are nothing new, by any means; it's been going on for decades at the benefit of business and lower costs for manufacturers/producers with no thought ever given on the human side. Then, the economy tanks and fingers need to be pointed...who better than a group of people that they've encouraged to come for their benefit that cannot defend themselves?

• Does anybody out there notice his obsession with going after people who can't defend themselves? Children are easy targets for a high school bully that resides within the lard-laced body of an aging adult.

• Watch out for this "Mark" guy as you read this thread. He's a troll from F.A.I.R. who is trying to take the high road towards "open dialog". But as you read the exchanges, you'll notice that his definition of open dialog is to repeat the same thing, over and over, as long . . . . as the dialog remains "open". "Mark" is very selective as to what he uses, entirely disregarding counter-arguments. "Mark" is employing an old Nazi trick by repeating his mantra, over and over again, all this the hope that his point of view will make start to make sense in the mind of you, Dear Reader. And every time anyone responds to him, "Mark" just continues to post the same drivel, in order to also be the first post anyone reads. Go ahead . . . read through this thread and you will discover my claims are true. "Mark" (AKA F.A.I.R. Troll) ignores the content of responses, but keeps trying to stay "on top" Also, notice how many times he posts, repeatedly. Go away, F.A.I.R. Troll "Mark".

• Look @ Russell Pearce face close - he is an OLD, BITTER MAN. And I bet he has to take high blood pressure meds.

• "Finally, if you really wanted to solve the problem, which I don't believe for a second you do, you'd want to bring these people into the system so they pay the taxes in the open you don't think they don't pay. But you don't. All you whine about is fact statistics and fake arguments and false options that drag this out for year after year after year after year." Believe what you want. I want the solution to the problem to be in the best interests of Americans not illegal invaders. Again, I never said they don't pay any taxes. They just don't pay enough to cover their social costs. If allowed to remain here and pay additional taxes they are at the poverty level with many dependaents so therefore they would pay literally no income taxes. Americans need those jobs at a fair wage and their tax contributions would be much higher. I haven't used any fake arguments at all. I have repeated over and over that my main objection is to rewarding illegal aliens with allowing them to remain here and what this does to our population growth and the added demands to our resources. We already take in 1.5 milliion legal immigrants a year. We just don't have the jobs and resources anymore. The last amnesty only encouraged 4 times the number of illegal aliens to jump our borders after that. When is enough, enough? "You, sir, are the problem. You and people who think like you are the reason we can't get to a solution to the problem." No, sir it is you and your ilk that are the problem. You put illlegal foreigners above the well beiing of your own country and its citizens.

• "Yuma is the lettuce capital of the country in the Winter and they can't "Americans" who want to do the work. One farmer said he needs 30,000 workers to bring all of his crop in one Winter season and he can't find the workers." It is true that most Americans won't pick crops for a living. Most Americans are educated and can't afford to feed a family on crop picking and it isn't something you can make a career out of anyway since the body gives out in a short time. But crop pickers only make up 2% of our entire workforce. Most illegals aren't picking crops. They are taking construction jobs and other blue collar jobs that Americans have always done for a fair wage until the cheap, illegal labor came along. For these crop picking jobs where farmers can't find American workers there are unlimited H-2A visas but the farmers have to pay them more and meet more than slave labor standards for these legal immigrant crop pickers. So these farmers have no excuse but greed and they do not pass any savings on to us in the grocery store. And I am the one "full of shit"? Educate yourself.

• "You're a worthless troll" I have been very civil in here. You cannot refute my arguments so typical of you lefties and ethnocentric to resort to insults and the race card also. Now who is the real troll?

• "And this is usually what happens when the government deports the parents and the child is still a minor with no relatives to stay with in the U.S. So What? The child is still a U.S. Citizen." The deported parents can take their minor U.S. children with them. Too bad so many don't have all those family values that they claim to have and leave them here to fend for themselves instead. So what that they are citizens? They can return to this country when they are no longer minors. No one will stop them. In the meantime minors belong with their parents.

• Reading comprehension and facts are not a strong point for you. You know, there are actually legitimate arguments to be made for your side. Unfortunately, your unable to recognize or articulate them. I can look at any right wing white supremacist website and read what you regurgitate. As Lou Show says...your nothing more than a worthless troll.

• And this is usually what happens when the government deports the parents and the child is still a minor with no relatives to stay with in the U.S. So What? The child is still a U.S. Citizen.

• You are soooo full of shit. I mean completely, unadulterated loaded with shit it oozing out of your pores. There are countless examples of businesses, read this slowly, t-r-y-i-n-g to hire Americans to do the work AND THEY CAN'T FIND THEM. Yuma is the lettuce capital of the country in the Winter and they can't "Americans" who want to do the work. One farmer said he needs 30,000 workers to bring all of his crop in one Winter season and he can't find the workers. Thirty-fucking thousand workers. If those are jobs American will do, then how come the population isn't growing like cray in Yuma? If the jobs "illegals" are taking are opening up because they're leave the state, then how come the unemployment rate is still going up? If 100,000 jobs are opening up because they're leaving, then how come Arizona only created 11,800 jobs in the last two years? Get a clue. Seriously. Get a freaking clue. There are business owners who raised wages an additional $5/hr to $20/hr and cannot find Americans to do the work. Yes, $20 per hour and Americans won't take the work. How you gonna blame that on "illegals?" http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/employment/2007-03-13-immigration-usat_N.htm Finally, if you really wanted to solve the problem, which I don't believe for a second you do, you'd want to bring these people into the system so they pay the taxes in the open you don't think they don't pay. But you don't. All you whine about is fact statistics and fake arguments and false options that drag this out for year after year after year after year. You, sir, are the problem. You and people who think like you are the reason we can't get to a solution to the problem.

• "Why indeed. An adult, who is an American born children of illegal aliens is an American citizen. They should not have to move to Mexico, like you have proposed." Mexico offers dual citizenship so they are also Mexican nationals. The whole family can leave including their illegal parents back to Mexico where they all hold citizenship. Wouldn't want that separation of families thingy to happen, now would we?

• "There is no incentive to them doing so. Every reason you've stated is either a lie or not fact. You've failed to supply proof of your claims. You conveniently left this off the quote. Nor am I in any sort of denial, rather it is reality and facts." No sense in arguing with you on this since you refuse to accept the fact that illegals come here for all the incentives, jobs, benefits, birthright citizenship. Continue to stay in denial and stick your head in the sand then. "Let's give logic one more try....Since you focus on Mexicans...How do they get here (and let's work with pregnant ones, right, they are coming here to give birth, or..are they so devious that it's all planned, they come here THEN get pregnant?)...So, let's get back to them getting here. Pregnant Mexican woman just walks across the border? Too simple. Ah, they walk several dozen miles...in the desert. YES, this seems like something any pregnant woman could do! Or, crammed in a vehicle with several others for hours on end? Absolutely!" Some Mexican woman come here pregnant and some get pregnant after getting here so what is your point? The Border Patrol has seen the pregnant ones themselves and trucks and vans have been stopped by law enforcement with pregnant illegals in them. There have been many stories reported on the news of pregnant illegals being caught at the border. Where have you been living, in a cave? I suggest you watch some news stories on tv and read a newspaper once in awhile. "Do illegals that are here end up getting pregnant when they are here? Absolutely. Is it some sort of devious plot (and you keep referring to reconquista theories)? No. Oh, wait...their offspring will give them a path to citizenship...Sure, in a perfect world and current wait times...figure when the kid turns 18 he can apply...so about 25 years to go that route? But then there's the tricky part of how he was born here to parents who were undocumented...Or is it in hopes of Amnesty, as you like to allude? No sane Mexican is deluded enough to think the US is going to do this" They are that deluded because Obama and past administrations have been promising amnesty to them and with a U.S. born anchor they would be the first to be considered. "Finally, I'm working some of your logic. You've said several times that "all/most Native Americans oppose illegal immigration. You've cited as your sole source your wife, whom you claim is Navajo. So your wife speaks for every Native American, correct? Well, I'm of Mexican descent and my wife's Mexican, now a naturalized US citizen. I asked her over dinner how many Mexican women come here to have babies so they can soak the system and become a system. She said none." Show some proof that many or even many descendants of the tribes of those indigenous to our country are thrilled about this illegal invasion from Mexico. I see, so since your wife is Mexican she knows exactly what all Mexican illegal woman are thinking? You say my wife shouldn't speak for all Native Americans but then you say your wife can speak for all Mexican women? LOL!

• "Few of these jobs have been open solely for undocumented workers; they were and are available for Americans. Why haven't Americans taken those jobs?" Americans can't get hired for them at a fair wage, that's why The illegal takes the cheap wage and the employers will hire them instead. Good, Lord this isn't rocket science, you know. No American should have to compete with an illegal for slave wages to work in their own damned country. Many of these jobs since they hire mostly Spanish speaking illegals won't hire a mono-English speaking American because they wouldn't be able to communicate with these illegals on the job. "Oh, wait...do you realize that you just recognized that undocumented workers DO pay taxes? That's not what you said before?" I never said that no illegals pay any taxes. What are you smoking? They just don't pay enough to cover their social costs.

• <i>"I am retired for one thing. Why should an American move to Mexico. . . "</i> =-======================= Why indeed. An adult, who is an American born children of illegal aliens is an American citizen. They should not have to move to Mexico, like you have proposed.

• 'Then why don't you move there? Surely someone with your background, you would be able to make lots of money. Why would you force someone else who has spent their entire life in America to do the job for you?" I am retired for one thing. Why should an American move to Mexico because Mexican citizens have taken American jobs in the U.S. KInd of doing things in reverse, aren't you?

• Mark wrote: <i>"Mexico in particular needs educated adults. "</i> ============================== Then why don't you move there? Surely someone with your background, you would be able to make lots of money. Why would you force someone else who has spent their entire life in America to do the job for you?

• Mark Wrote: <i>"Courts make wrong decisions all the time and it is PC that has ruined this country for some time now."</i> ============================== These decisions date back to the 19th century, are you saying that they were PC back then?

• "I am not a member of Fair nor am I a troll. What is it about you lefties that can't stand another point of view without hurling insults? I see your side stating the same things over and over also. Pot, kettle, black." While you may not be a card carrying FAIR member, your linking to their web sites does mark you as a WANNA-BE member. As for you being a TROLL, you most certainly fall into that category, You do not offer you own opinion on the matter on which you are commenting, you just post verbatim the opinions of persons who are in FAIR and it's hooded sister sites. You have asked for a open debate and have at least twice been given the OK to start on as long as you can do it with your own reasoning and not parroting the posts from FAIR and so far all you have done is complain about the other posters and continue to post the opinion of others in their own words and not your own. "Your side uses no reason or logic." Again , you seem incapable of recognizing what reasoning or logic actually are because you are too used to parroting verbatim the verbiage of others and you are not actually researching how or where anything that is presented to you is derived from. "Just misplaced emotionalism for immigration lawbreakers and demonizing anyone who doesn't go along with your anti-American points of view. " Again the people from fair and it's other hooded sister sites are manipulating your emotions with rhetoric and faulty/ creative math and you again have not bothered to check out how the numbers that they get are arrived at. As for name calling - every time you drop Anchor baby, Jackpot baby, not only are you attacking infants who are not able to speak for themselves you are name calling yourself. Now I realize that nothing I write here will in anyway change your thinking since you are a FAIR TROLL but it makes me fell better to know that the other readers will see this and take heart that they are not the only ones that see you for the tool that you plainly are. Wayne

• "The jobs they would take if allowed to remain here would be taken by Americans and they in turn would pay in the same taxes." Few of these jobs have been open solely for undocumented workers; they were and are available for Americans. Why haven't Americans taken those jobs? Oh, wait...do you realize that you just recognized that undocumented workers DO pay taxes? That's not what you said before?

• There is no incentive to them doing so. Every reason you've stated is either a lie or not fact. You've failed to supply proof of your claims. You conveniently left this off the quote. Nor am I in any sort of denial, rather it is reality and facts. Let's give logic one more try....Since you focus on Mexicans...How do they get here (and let's work with pregnant ones, right, they are coming here to give birth, or..are they so devious that it's all planned, they come here THEN get pregnant?)...So, let's get back to them getting here. Pregnant Mexican woman just walks across the border? Too simple. Ah, they walk several dozen miles...in the desert. YES, this seems like something any pregnant woman could do! Or, crammed in a vehicle with several others for hours on end? Absolutely! Do illegals that are here end up getting pregnant when they are here? Absolutely. Is it some sort of devious plot (and you keep referring to reconquista theories)? No. Oh, wait...their offspring will give them a path to citizenship...Sure, in a perfect world and current wait times...figure when the kid turns 18 he can apply...so about 25 years to go that route? But then there's the tricky part of how he was born here to parents who were undocumented...Or is it in hopes of Amnesty, as you like to allude? No sane Mexican is deluded enough to think the US is going to do this. Finally, I'm working some of your logic. You've said several times that "all/most Native Americans oppose illegal immigration. You've cited as your sole source your wife, whom you claim is Navajo. So your wife speaks for every Native American, correct? Well, I'm of Mexican descent and my wife's Mexican, now a naturalized US citizen. I asked her over dinner how many Mexican women come here to have babies so they can soak the system and become a system. She said none. So, using your methodology, you now have definitive proof that your theories(well those you regurgitate) are wrong.

• Not original intent, but original meaning; the original meaning of words as understood by the population at the time they were written. This is a common misunderstanding of "originalism". In many ways, it can be said that legislative intent is irrelevant; it is precisely because there are so many possible versions of the intended "spirit of the law", that we have "the letterbof the law".

• "Spin, Mark, spin!"

• Watch out for this "Mark" guy as you read this thread. He's a troll from F.A.I.R. who is trying to take the high road towards "open dialog". But as you read the exchanges, you'll notice that his definition of open dialog is to repeat the same thing, over and over, as long . . . . as the dialog remains "open". "Mark" is very selective as to what he uses, entirely disregarding counter-arguments. "Mark" is employing an old Nazi trick by repeating his mantra, over and over again, all this the hope that his point of view will make start to make sense in the mind of you, Dear Reader. And every time anyone responds to him, "Mark" just continues to post the same drivel, in order to also be the first post anyone reads. Go ahead . . . read through this thread and you will discover my claims are true. "Mark" (AKA F.A.I.R. Troll) ignores the content of responses, but keeps trying to stay "on top" Also, notice how many times he posts, repeatedly. Go away, F.A.I.R. Troll "Mark".

• "So your wife is the offspring of a captured concubine and a European invader. So her thinking has been destroyed by the European contamination that is so obviously evident in your posts. It is no wonder that she thinks like the milky white invader she beds, feh!" No, my wife doesn't live in the past and she knows that Americans alive today are not responsible for the past. She accepts the fact that not only did white people migrate here but so did Asians, Blacks, etc. at a later date and they came under U.S. immigration law. She isn't concerned about any conflicts that occured between her ancestoral tribes and the Europeans. This is 2010 now, not hundreds of years ago and all those people are dead now and every modern day country has immigration laws. Those coming here illegally mostly from Mexico have no claims on U.S. territory because their ancestoral tribes were not indigenous to the U.S. and Mexico was paid millions for some southwest territories long ago. I am not a milky white invader. I was born here and my ancestors came here under U.S. immigration law and nowhere in my family tree did any of my ancestors come duriing the early settler years and subsequent conflicts with the natives. Or am I guilty just because I have white skin? "Immigration and assimilation, no matter how you try to spin it, are the cornerstones that made this country what it is today. And this is why there are still places called Little Italy, Little Germany, Little fill in the blank in every city in the US?" There is a difference between small pockets of ethnic business neighborhoods and an entire group of people throughout our nation refusing to assimilate to our language and culture out in public. I don't care what language or culture one chooses to practice at home. "No, it is 2010, and racists have finally learned that MOST Americans are not tolerant of others wearing sheets and hoods and spouting racist crap so now the couch their words in what ever the FEAR DU JUR is and right now that fear is economic trouble" So how many Americans are wearing sheets and hoods and spouting racist crap? What does that have to do with our right to have and to enforce our immigration laws? Those who desire that (and they are the majority of Americans regardless of race) are racists for that? Millions of Americans are out of work. Why shouldn't they fear not being able to take care of their own families due to cheap, illegal labor? "The writer's of that amendment were clear that children of illegal aliens regardless of their skin color or race were not to be granted our precious citizenship" Please site EXACTLY in the 14th does it say EXACTLY that. YOU CAN"T BECASUE IT DOES NOT EXIST." So your wife is the offspring of a captured concubine and a European invader. So her thinking has been destroyed by the European contamination that is so obviously evident in your posts. It is no wonder that she thinks like the milky white invader she beds, feh! "Immigration and assimilation, no matter how you try to spin it, are the cornerstones that made this country what it is today." And this is why there are still places called Little Italy, Little Germany, Little fill in the blank in every city in the US? "That was in the past. This is 2010 now where racism is unacceptable and most Americans are not racist just because they want our immigration laws enforced" No, it is 2010, and racists have finally learned that MOST Americans are not tolerant of others wearing sheets and hoods and spouting racist crap so now the couch their words in what ever the FEAR DU JUR is and right now that fear is economic trouble/ "The writer's of that amendment were clear that children of illegal aliens regardless of their skin color or race were not to be granted our precious citizenship" Please site EXACTLY in the 14th does it say EXACTLY that. YOU CAN"T BECASUE IT DOES NOT EXIST. So your wife is the offspring of a captured concubine and a European invader. So her thinking has been destroyed by the European contamination that is so obviously evident in your posts. It is no wonder that she thinks like the milky white invader she beds, feh! "Immigration and assimilation, no matter how you try to spin it, are the cornerstones that made this country what it is today." And this is why there are still places called Little Italy, Little Germany, Little fill in the blank in every city in the US? "That was in the past. This is 2010 now where racism is unacceptable and most Americans are not racist just because they want our immigration laws enforced" No, it is 2010, and racists have finally learned that MOST Americans are not tolerant of others wearing sheets and hoods and spouting racist crap so now the couch their words in what ever the FEAR DU JUR is and right now that fear is economic trouble/ "The writer's of that amendment were clear that children of illegal aliens regardless of their skin color or race were not to be granted our precious citizenship" Please site EXACTLY in the 14th does it say EXACTLY that. YOU CAN"T BECASUE IT DOES NOT EXIST." http://www.14thamendment.us/articles/anchor_babies_unconstitutionality.html http://www.14thamendment.us/articles/anchor_babies_unconstitutionality.html

• "You have asked for a open dialog, I am offering you a chance to start a dialog but with your own thoughts an reasons and not someone elses." My thoughts are my own based on common sense and logic. Common sense says that children of illegal aliens born on our soil should not and never were intended to be instant citizens and this: You have asked for a open dialog, I am offering you a chance to start a dialog but with your own thoughts an reasons and not someone elses. You have asked for a open dialog, I am offering you a chance to start a dialog but with your own thoughts an reasons and not someone elses. http://www.14thamendment.us/articles/anchor_babies_unconstitutionality.html

• MARK is a troll for F.A.I.R. His intention is to wear anybody down who responds to him . . . by repeating the same thing, over and over again. So it's no wonder this thread has been reduced to name-calling, because how many times can you use reasoning and logic with someone who refuses to see it . . . until frustration sets in? I have no patience for these trolls.

• "Over 100 years of court decisions have intepreted the clause the same way. What makes you smarter than all those Supreme Court Justices?" Courts make wrong decisions all the time and it is PC that has ruined this country for some time now. If you are so sure you are right then why not let the SC revisit this amendment and delve into the true meaning that the writers intended it to mean? What you afraid of? You think our immigration laws should be changed and not enforced. Why the double standard for yourself as far as opinions go?

• "Do you teach your kids that if they steal from a store that it OK to do that or do you make them return the stolen item because that is the RIGHT thing to do? If you do, then what is the difference in what you proposed above and give back the land that was stolen?" It isn't the descendants of the tribes indigenous to THIS country that are complaining. It is the Mestizo Mexicans who are also part Spaniard that are complaining about stolen land (which Mexico was paid 15 million dollars for). What are these illegal Mexicans doing all over the U.S.? Their native tribes were from south of our border and Mexico only occupied a small part of the southwest for a short time. We have treaties with those descendants of the tribes indigenous to THIS country. Why is it Mexicans complaining about the past and not them? As I said, if you have any beefs then take it up with our government and stop demonizing white Americans today for a past they played no role in. I notice that you aren't complaining about the Asians, Blacks and other races who came here later and not uninvited by the native indians. Whether they had any conflicts with the natives is irrelevant isn't it if they never got an invitation from the native indians? You apparently are racist against white Americans over a past they played no role in. Get over yourself or complain to our government, not us.

• "Well that is what you are doing now, you are living in a country that you have no rights to be living in now." This from a strong advocate of birthright citizenship? You do know what hypocricy means, don't you? According to U.S. law as it stands now, everyone born on our soil is a citizen and belongs here. Why the double standard for your anchors but Americans who have been here for generations and were all born here, don't belong here? FYI, that wouldn't only be whites you know. It would mean every person regardlesss of what continent their ancestors were from or what race or ethnicity they are, wouldn't belong here even though they were born here. Good God, get a grip and take it up with our government and stop beating up on U.S. citizens. Are you a full blooded descendant of a tribe indigenous to THIS country? If not, then you don't have even the weakest case to make. Mestizo Mexicans aren't indigenous to this country. They have that white European, Spanish blood coursing through their veins. When are they packing up for Spain?

• I have already posted examples of how the Germans were part of the settling of Native American lands that was not theirs to begin with and how they killed those same native Americans to keep what was stolen. ALL European countries sent settlers to the NEW world so all are guilty of genocide. As for the polish, one name for ya bucko - Count Casmir Polaski - How many of the Legion that he asked Washington to grant him were Fellow Pollocks? Close to 45%. Since the Iroquois League split, with 2 nations assisting the rebels and 4 assisting the British , Polaski and his troops killed a large number of Native Americans - MY DIRECT ancestors. " "Well then Mark, your families are one of those Subsequent settlers then, and you have benefited from the crimes of your parents and their parents." No, my family was not. They were the Germans and the Poles who didn't come here till well after the conflicts between the settlers and the native indians" "Do you NOT understand what the phrase Subsequent settlers means? and again Germans and poles were too part of the Eurpoean immigrant wave to flood the lands of the peoples who were native to the Americas BEFORE the Europeans decided to STEAL by force and biological attacks what they wanted but it belonged to someone else." My ancestors were not settlers, they were legal immigrants. I am not related to every German person of the past. I am only related to my own family tree. None of this happened in my family tree. Do you always blame others for the sins of unrelated people out of the past?

• "You continually cite people coming to the US solely to give birth to children in order for them to be citizens. You continually cite the cost to US taxpayers" I never said that they all come here for that purpose but it is a huge incentive. Many learn after getting here that producing even one anchor entitles them to all kinds of freebies. They also believe that if an amnesty is ever given again they will be first in line for it because of their citizen children. Remain in denial all you like. It doesn't change the facts.

• "As I pointed out earlier, those children grow up to be productive members of society, paying taxes and returning the investment back ten fold. Your solution would destroy that return on the investment." They can be productive members of their society in their homelands. Mexico in particular needs educated adults. The jobs they would take if allowed to remain here would be taken by Americans and they in turn would pay in the same taxes. Cut our losses now.

• No. YOU think that the parents think that. In reality, you have no idea what they think. "The reality is that this is not true. Citizen children do not "Anchor" the parents here. you know this and it is rather dismissive, ignorant, and biased of you to assume that the parents don't know this as well." It is ignorant of you to deny the truth. Many of these parents think that with citizenship children they will be granted amnesty someday. These are people who are very undeducated for the most part. Same thing with the Dreamies. They think because they attended our schools and their family is established on our soil that will give them a foot in the door to legalization. Don't play dumb here.

• "MARK is a troll for F.A.I.R. His intention is to wear anybody down who responds to him . . . by repeating the same thing, over and over again. So it's no wonder this thread has been reduced to name-calling, because how many times can you use reasoning and logic with someone who refuses to see it . . . until frustration sets in? I have no patience for these trolls." I am not a member of Fair nor am I a troll. What is it about you lefties that can't stand another point of view without hurling insults? I see your side stating the same things over and over also. Pot, kettle, black. Your side uses no reason or logic. Just misplaced emotionalism for immigration lawbreakers and demonizing anyone who doesn't go along with your anti-American points of view. When I started reading this forum including the other topics there was already name calling going on before I ever started posting. Nice try, but no cigar.

• MARK is a troll for F.A.I.R. His intention is to wear anybody down who responds to him . . . by repeating the same thing, over and over again. So it's no wonder this thread has been reduced to name-calling, because how many times can you use reasoning and logic with someone who refuses to see it . . . until frustration sets in? I have no patience for these trolls.

• Mark wrote: <i>"These parents think they can anchor themselves unto our country by doing this also."</i><br>---------------------------------------------<br><br>No. <b>YOU</b> think that the parents think that. In reality, you have no idea what they think. <br><br>The reality is that this is not true. Citizen children do not "Anchor" the parents here. you know this and it is rather dismissive, ignorant, and biased of you to assume that the parents don't know this as well. <br>

• Mark wrote: <i>"". . . children being given citizenship from their lawlessness and therefore entitled to all kinds of freebies in this country that they shouldn't be entitled to."</i><br>=================================<br>As I pointed out earlier, those children grow up to be productive members of society, paying taxes and returning the investment back ten fold. Your solution would destroy that return on the investment.

• oops, wrong reply button

• nm

• "Oh I see, this is all about race and skin color to you. So even though my ancestors were the Germans and Poles, they had white skin so they are to be held accountable for what the English and the Spaniards did even though they were never a part of that. Gotcha! " I have already posted examples of how the Germans were part of the settling of Native American lands that was not theirs to begin with and how they killed those same native Americans to keep what was stolen. ALL European countries sent settlers to the NEW world so all are guilty of genocide. As for the polish, one name for ya bucko - Count Casmir Polaski - How many of the Legion that he asked Washington to grant him were Fellow Pollocks? Close to 45%. Since the Iroquois League split, with 2 nations assisting the rebels and 4 assisting the British , Polaski and his troops killed a large number of Native Americans - MY DIRECT ancestors. " "Well then Mark, your families are one of those Subsequent settlers then, and you have benefited from the crimes of your parents and their parents." No, my family was not. They were the Germans and the Poles who didn't come here till well after the conflicts between the settlers and the native indians" Do you NOT understand what the phrase Subsequent settlers means? and again Germans and poles were too part of the Eurpoean immigrant wave to flood the lands of the peoples who were native to the Americas BEFORE the Europeans decided to STEAL by force and biological attacks what they wanted but it belonged to someone else.

• "I don't recall the Germans or the Poles having conflicts with the native indians. Please enlighten me to that part of history that I must have missed." Here is just one example of your ignorance: The Tuscarora War was fought in North Carolina during the autumn of 1711 until 11 February 1715 between the British, Dutch, and German settlers and the Tuscarora Native Americans Next example Battle of Point Pleasant, a not-so-pleasant engagement with Shawnees on the banks of the Ohio River fought by a group of early German settlers called Dunkards, This was in south carolina That was 2 examples of your own peoples history that you did not know about "What would you have me and other Americans do, move to a country they weren't born in and have no right to live in?" Well that is what you are doing now, you are living in a country that you have no rights to be living in now. "Throughout history wars have been fought and lands exchanged hands throughout the world." Actually you can only prove that once the ancestors of what would become the Europeans broke free from Africa that what you say did happen. Here in the NEW world where there was land to expand peacefully into there were no recorded conflicts of the same scale till close to the last 500 to 1000 years prior to the European invaders making land fall. "Shall everyone in the world turn back lands to their original owners from thousands of years ago?" And what would the problem with that be? Do you teach your kids that if they steal from a store that it OK to do that or do you make them return the stolen item because that is the RIGHT thing to do? If you do, then what is the difference in what you proposed above and give back the land that was stolen?

• "It would be a step forward to stop the scam of illegal alien parents giving birth on our soil and their children being given citizenship from their lawlessness and therefore entitled to all kinds of freebies in this country that they shouldn't be entitled to. These parents think they can anchor themselves unto our country by doing this also. It would be a step forward finally interpreting the 14th amendment the way it was meant to be. " You continually cite people coming to the US solely to give birth to children in order for them to be citizens. You continually cite the cost to US taxpayers I'd be interested to see you cite actual numbers and facts from a non biased source.

• Quote Montrose Mike: "Well dinkus, by linking to Fred's site you have linked your self to white separatists. By using their arguments you have linked yourself to them. By your desire to change the 14th amendment you have linked yourself to them. Whether or not you want to admit it YOU ARE ONE OF THEM." First off my name is Mark, not Dinkus. Can't you lefties debate without insults? It doesn't matter what site I linked to, it is the message that is important. I don't agree with the basic concepts of any white supremists groups and I am not one of them but that doesn't mean we can't agree on "some" things. The brown supremists and reconquistas I am sure you could find some common ground with also but that doesn't mean that you agree with all of their agendas. Pot, kettle, black. FYI, it isn't only white Americans that want birthright citizenship re-interpreted. You seem to be hung up on race and skin color. We aren't all a one size fits all regardless of race, skin color or ethnicity. There is nothing "supremist" about not wanting to give away our citizenship like candy via lawlessness. It would also deny citizenship to children of whites here illegally but don't let that little fact get in the way of your biased thinking.

• Chilidawg 18 hours ago in reply to Mark "Why do you have a problem with another amendment?" ---------------- "Because such an amendment would be a major step backwards, and futile as well." A step backwards? Sorry, no it would be a step forward doing what most countries do. It would be a step forward to stop the scam of illegal alien parents giving birth on our soil and their children being given citizenship from their lawlessness and therefore entitled to all kinds of freebies in this country that they shouldn't be entitled to. These parents think they can anchor themselves unto our country by doing this also. It would be a step forward finally interpreting the 14th amendment the way it was meant to be. Futile? I don't think. This is going to gain momementum in our country. Speaking of futile how is CIR, amnesty and the Dream Act going for you folks?

• Quote Dave too: "Well then Mark, your families are one of those Subsequent settlers then, and you have benefited from the crimes of your parents and their parents." No, my family was not. They were the Germans and the Poles who didn't come here till well after the conflicts between the settlers and the native indians. My ancestors commited no crimes against any natives. They didn't even come here till after the U.S. was established as a country with immigration laws. "By the way, people from Spain are also WHITE Europeans and so are the Italians and every one else from any country with a boarder that touches the Mediterranean all the way up and including Turkey." Oh I see, this is all about race and skin color to you. So even though my ancestors were the Germans and Poles, they had white skin so they are to be held accountable for what the English and the Spaniards did even though they were never a part of that. Gotcha! "Just because white Europeans started an illegal war of conquest with the indigenous people of south America does not give them any more rights to that land then the white European invaders that took North America by the use of force and biological warfare." Why do you lump all Europeans and all white people together? Only a couple of countries in Europe were involved in that. None of them were my ancestors. "Your reasoning boils down to , WHA WHA WHA we don't other people coming into the territory we illegally took from it's rightful owners and doing the same thing to us. IT just aint FAIR." Mexicans never owned much of the U.S. so what are you talking about? You don't own anything anymore that you sold to someone else. All countries have immigration laws. Is it only the U.S. that you are denying that right to? Why is that? As I said, perhaps you should take up your gripes with the U.S. government rather than beating up on white Americans your entire life.

• I am reposting this for Mark: In 1866, during the Debates preceding the passage of the 14th amendment in Congress, Senator Edgar Cowen (R-PA) made an impassioned speech AGAINST the birthright citizenship clause of the amendment. His argument was that the birthright clause would endow the Gypsies in his state with all the rights and privileges of citizens, since he considered Gypsies to be Alien trespassers. –”expel(ing) a certain number of people who invade her borders; who owe her no allegiance; who pretend to owe none; who recognize no authority in her government; who have a distinct, independent government of there own . . . I mean the Gypsies. . . . These people live in the country and are born in the country. They infest society. . . . Are these people, by a constitutional amendment to be put out of reach of the state in which they live? I mean as a class. If the mere fact of being born in the country confers that right, then they will have it; and I think it will be mischievous. . . Therefore I think, before we assert broadly that everybody who shall be born in the United States shall be taken to be a citizen of the United States, we aught to exclude others besides Indians not taxed.” – Change the word: "Gypsies" to "Mexican" and you have Mark's argument in a nutshell. BTW, the rest of the senators rejected Cowen's argument and Cowen wound up voting against the amendment.

• Mark wrote: <i>"we are are being burdened with the welfare costs, additional population growth, education and healthcare costs and the depletion of our natural resources by a half million anchors being born on our soil each year"</i> ---------- Do you understand that we recapture all of those cost and then some to an average profit of $125,000 per citizen that we educate through high school? Citizen children grow up to be productive citizen adults. <br>

• "FYI, my wife is part Navajo herself. She is opposed to illegal immigration. She is smart enough to realize that we allow in 1.5 million legal immigrants each year so just what are we missing out on in the case of diversity? It is illegal immigration that is the objection not legal immigration." So your wife is the offspring of a captured concubine and a European invader. So her thinking has been destroyed by the European contamination that is so obviously evident in your posts. It is no wonder that she thinks like the milky white invader she beds, feh! "Immigration and assimilation, no matter how you try to spin it, are the cornerstones that made this country what it is today." And this is why there are still places called Little Italy, Little Germany, Little fill in the blank in every city in the US? "That was in the past. This is 2010 now where racism is unacceptable and most Americans are not racist just because they want our immigration laws enforced" No, it is 2010, and racists have finally learned that MOST Americans are not tolerant of others wearing sheets and hoods and spouting racist crap so now the couch their words in what ever the FEAR DU JUR is and right now that fear is economic trouble/ "The writer's of that amendment were clear that children of illegal aliens regardless of their skin color or race were not to be granted our precious citizenship" Please site EXACTLY in the 14th does it say EXACTLY that. YOU CAN"T BECASUE IT DOES NOT EXIST.

• Quote Tommy Collins: "It's not a reward, Mark. The child has no control of where the mother is when she gives birth. If she happens to be in the United States of America and gives birth then, by law, the child is a citizen, just as I became a citizen at birth. You can NOT like the current law, Mark, but it's not going to be changed, regardless of the efforts of pearce or your kind." My argument is that is not what the writer's of the 14th amendment intended. Birthright citizenship has been interpreted incorrectly for some time now. Yes, it is the law right now but what is so horrible to seek out the correct interpretation of it? You have no problem seeking changes to our immigration laws, do you? What is the difference? I wouldn't bet the farm on it not being changed. Momementum is gaining in support of it since we are are being burdened with the welfare costs, additional population growth, education and healthcare costs and the depletion of our natural resources by a half million anchors being born on our soil each year. Most countries require that at least one parent be a citizen or legal immigrant in order for their children born on our soil to gain birthright citizenship. It is the right thing to do for our country in view of the abuse that has been going on for years now via illegal immigration.

• Mark wrote: "No, I am advocating that illegal alien parents do not get rewarded for breaking our immigration laws by granting their kids our precious citizenship. I think it disgusting, evil and un-American for any loyal Americans to think so little of our citizenship that it should be given away by a lawless act." ======= How exactly are the parents rewarded? Even their non-citizen children (born abroad) are entitled to the same basic health and education services and citizen children.

• mark wrote: <i>"The writer's of that amendment were clear that children of illegal aliens regardless of their skin color or race were not to be granted our precious citizenship through their parents unlawful presence in our country."</i> Did you read the actual debates? you are quite wrong in your assertion.

• Quote Davetoo: S"o your argument is that since your ancestors invaded and took the lands of Europe from the Neanderthal from when they crossed over from Africa it is OK for you and your immediate ancestors to come and wipe out the people who migrated into an empty land 20 or 30 thousand years before hand." My ancestors did no such thing. They came here after the U.S. was established as a country and came through legal channels. Do you know how much immigration occured well after the native indian conflicts? Apparently not! How are they responsible for what the first settlers may or may not have done? My ancestors weren't even from England. They were from Germany and Poland. I don't recall the Germans or the Poles having conflicts with the native indians. Please enlighten me to that part of history that I must have missed. "So you feel that it is OK for people of European descent to invade and inflict grievous harm through the use of force and biological warfare to take controll of what land and resources that they want no matter the prior inhabitants had to say on the matter?" No, I don't but my ancestors were never a part of that. Unless you want to make all peoples on the European continent responsible for what the English or Spanish did. My ancestors weren't from either of those countries. "You then spout MODERN law of the invader people to say that what you are doing is right and legal. Then you spout that the long held laws of the real owners do not matter because you hold the bigger stick." Maybe you should take up your arguments with our government then instead of chastizing every American alive today that played no role in the past. 'You then whine that YOU had no part in the THEFT of the land but you want to benefit from that theft and WOE unto the other descendants of Europeans that want to also benefit from that theft as well." What would you have me and other Americans do, move to a country they weren't born in and have no right to live in? Throughout history wars have been fought and lands exchanged hands throughout the world. Shall everyone in the world turn back lands to their original owners from thousands of years ago? Stop living in the past. Every modern day country has immigration laws no matter what happened hundreds or thousands of years ago. "I think that totally sums up your position as well as every other WHITE separatist " Where did I say I wanted an all white country? I have no problem with any other race or skin color just that immigrants come here legally.

• Mark wrote: <i>"My goal is to make Americans think like Americans instead of this fog hazed, lefty, liberal PC world that they are living in their heads without any thought to the future of this country and what this illegal immigration mess will mean if allowed to continue."</i> ====== Thought control. Big Brother would be proud.

• Mark wrote: "<i>No, I wish to see the 14th amendment reinterpreted because it is not being interpreted as it was meant to be</i>" === Over 100 years of court decisions have intepreted the clause the same way. What makes you smarter than all those Supreme Court Justices?

• Mark states: <i>"More illegal immigration would be curbed immensely without the incentive of birthright citizenship for their children. They wouldn't be entitled to all kinds of welfare for these kids if they weren't citizens for one thing."</i> Do you have any data to back that up? Citizenship is not the incentive, the ability to make enough money to survive is. Besides, under the Equal protection Clause, the non-citizen chidren have the same right to educational and health benifits as do citizen children. Do you want to blow up the equal protection clause as well?

• "No, I wish to see the 14th amendment reinterpreted because it is not being interpreted as it was meant to be" A mentor at Intel once told me a truism that has steered me well for the last 25 years. If you can not explain something in a way that an 9 year old will completely understand the problem and all the ramifications of the problem and all the viable solutions to lessen or eliminate the problem, then you do not understand the problem or the process well enough to correct it yourself. Can you state how it is being interpreted incorrectly (without quoting from any thing written by Fred Elbel) I have read the responses on this page and apart from some name calling that is not really called for most posters have been able to state why they think the changes you have called for in your other posts are not viable or accurate. At least they have used their own thoughts to counter your copied posts while you keep reiterating the same verbage from the same web site over and over again. I mean that when it comes to defending your side/point in this issue and not when countering attacks made against your person. You have asked for a open dialog, I am offering you a chance to start a dialog but with your own thoughts an reasons and not someone elses. Walt

• Quote Rob: "Selective history is a cool thing, huh Mark? It's always fun to pull bits and pieces from here and there to try and bolster your beliefs or viewpoint. Unfortunately, history is the greatest reality we have, and as Santayana said.."those who cannot remember the past...". I'm sure you can finish it up, right?" I acknowledge all history so just what selective history are you speaking of? Right, I'll finish that sentence for you, "those who can't remember the past are bound to repeat it". The Native indians didn't protect their lands from the Europeans so they lost them. We aren't going to allow Mexicans and other illegals to take this land from Americans of all ethnicities today so the past will not be repeated. "On a very recent trip I took through Northern Arizona, mostly on Navajoland, I marveled at the beauty that so few in Arizona realize is contained within our state. Passing through these areas, it was impossible to not juxtapose the current immigration issues I'd left only hours before in Phoenix, to the history of the Navajo. I marveled at the simplicity that still remains today of the Navajo farmers dwelling in the depths of Canyon de Chelly. I tried to envision life as it was for their ancestors, and those that came before them, not only in this crevasse, but throughout the state...and the country. It truly must have been something to behold. Then the "enlightened" man came along...the Spaniards, the Portuguese, the French and the English. And we have what we have today." FYI, my wife is part Navajo herself. She is opposed to illegal immigration. She is smart enough to realize that we allow in 1.5 million legal immigrants each year so just what are we missing out on in the case of diversity? It is illegal immigration that is the objection not legal immigration. "Immigration and assimilation, no matter how you try to spin it, are the cornerstones that made this country what it is today." That would be fine if it is legal immigration and there truly was assimilation happening as it use to. Not the case anymore. Far too much illegal immigration is preventing that. "History has proven that every attempt that has been made to subjugate or lessen a persons standing as a human because of their skin color, origin or nationality has resulted in utter failure. And rightfully so." That was in the past. This is 2010 now where racism is unacceptable and most Americans are not racist just because they want our immigration laws enforced. Why do you lefties always have to attribute racism to our right to enforce our immigration laws? As I said, we take in 1.5 million legal immigrants from all over the world per year so where is this racism? "The 14th Amendment recognizes and acknowledges the importance of immigration to this country. It places no barriers (with very few exceptions) nor does it discriminate, as you wish to. It ascertains a person born on United States soil is an American citizen. It completely and utterly validates that the United States is a nation built by immigrants and that an "American" cannot be defined solely by their skin color or origin." The 14th amendment has nothing to do with our desire for legal immigration or someone's skin color. Its intention was to clarify who would and would not be deemed a birth citizen. The writer's of that amendment were clear that children of illegal aliens regardless of their skin color or race were not to be granted our precious citizenship through their parents unlawful presence in our country. I have no problem with children born from legal immigrants or citizens being granted birth citizenship regardless of their race or skin color. It is a concept you can't seem to grasp. "Leave it alone." I have just as much right to fight for my cause as you do yours. Why don't you leave our immigration laws alone then and stop fighting the enforcement of them?

• Chilidawg 5 hours ago "Mark, what is it that you wish to do? Curb Illegal immigration? Then changing the 14th amendment is destined to be a colossal failure. Workers do not take enormous risks to come here because they want their children to become citizens, they come here because they want their children to live in something other than abject poverty and misery. They come here for jobs. Citizenship is a secondary consideration. They will not leave just because you changed the 14th amendment, nor will the change prevent them from coming here in the first place. Changing the 14th amendment will have little tangible effect on curbing illegal immigration." More illegal immigration would be curbed immensely without the incentive of birthright citizenship for their children. They wouldn't be entitled to all kinds of welfare for these kids if they weren't citizens for one thing. "Do you wish to change the 14th amendment to punish those who do come over here illegally"? No, I wish to see the 14th amendment reinterpreted because it is not being interpreted as it was meant to be and it is having a negative impact on our country having to care for all of these anchors via education, healthcare, welfare, etc. It is the principle of the thing also. No way should we be granting instant citizenship to kids born from illegal aliens who had no respect for our immigration laws. Their kids will be learning from the parents that it is ok to cheat, break the law and lie for one's own economic benefit. That doesn't make good citizens. "If that is the case, then you are advocating for the punishment of the child for the crimes of the parent. What a disgustingly evil and un-American concept." No, I am advocating that illegal alien parents do not get rewarded for breaking our immigration laws by granting their kids our precious citizenship. I think it disgusting, evil and un-American for any loyal Americans to think so little of our citizenship that it should be given away by a lawless act. "Please clarify your ultimate goal here." My goal is to make Americans think like Americans instead of this fog hazed, lefty, liberal PC world that they are living in their heads without any thought to the future of this country and what this illegal immigration mess will mean if allowed to continue.

• It was mentioned here that "aliens" are overwhelming us here in the United States. That is a bald-faced lie! Making up less than 2% of the population of the U.S. and not even half of those present here sans documentation but here undocumented because of a snafu in their immigration paperwork - AND with laws preventing them from obtaining benefits in place, these people present no possible way in which "we" may be overwhelmed! Unless, of course, if you're confusing the undocumented with the legal citizens whose parents may speak a different language or have a darker skin than yours. You people who obsess with undocumented immigrants are obviously bigots and should be shunned by all polite society.

• Selective history is a cool thing, huh Mark? It's always fun to pull bits and pieces from here and there to try and bolster your beliefs or viewpoint. Unfortunately, history is the greatest reality we have, and as Santayana said.."those who cannot remember the past...". I'm sure you can finish it up, right?<br><br>On a very recent trip I took through Northern Arizona, mostly on Navajoland, I marveled at the beauty that so few in Arizona realize is contained within our state. Passing through these areas, it was impossible to not juxtapose the current immigration issues I'd left only hours before in Phoenix, to the history of the Navajo. I marveled at the simplicity that still remains today of the Navajo farmers dwelling in the depths of Canyon de Chelly. I tried to envision life as it was for their ancestors, and those that came before them, not only in this crevasse, but throughout the state...and the country. It truly must have been something to behold. Then the "enlightened" man came along...the Spaniards, the Portuguese, the French and the English. And we have what we have today.<br><br>Immigration and assimilation, no matter how you try to spin it, are the cornerstones that made this country what it is today.<br><br>History has proven that every attempt that has been made to subjugate or lessen a persons standing as a human because of their skin color, origin or nationality has resulted in utter failure. And rightfully so. <br><br>The 14th Amendment recognizes and acknowledges the importance of immigration to this country. It places no barriers (with very few exceptions) nor does it discriminate, as you wish to. It ascertains a person born on United States soil is an American citizen. It completely and utterly validates that the United States is a nation built by immigrants and that an "American" cannot be defined solely by their skin color or origin.<br><br>Leave it alone.<br>

• Why limit ourselves to Russel's proposal? Maybe we should revoke EVERYONE's U.S. citizenship and make all residents pass a literacy exam, a civics exam, a background check, a "good moral" check, a financially sound check... (Hmm would Russel pass?) Maybe Arizona should be the immigration test market. We should revoke citizenship of all AZ residents who were not born here from native AZ born parents. Just think how clear the freeways would be!

• I am Kanienkehaka and this was my country from before the vikings landed in Newfoundland back in 1000AD. "No one is really iindigenous to this continent anyway. Even the first humans came from somewhere else" So your argument is that since your ancestors invaded and took the lands of Europe from the Neanderthal from when they crossed over from Africa it is OK for you and your immediate ancestors to come and wipe out the people who migrated into an empty land 20 or 30 thousand years before hand. So you feel that it is OK for people of European descent to invade and inflict grievous harm through the use of force and biological warfare to take controll of what land and resources that they want no matter the prior inhabitants had to say on the matter? You then spout MODERN law of the invader people to say that what you are doing is right and legal. Then you spout that the long held laws of the real owners do not matter because you hold the bigger stick. You then whine that YOU had no part in the THEFT of the land but you want to benefit from that theft and WOE unto the other descendants of Europeans that want to also benefit from that theft as well. I think that totally sums up your position as well as every other WHITE separatist out there.

• Well then Mark, your families are one of those Subsequent settlers then, and you have benefited from the crimes of your parents and their parents. By the way, people from Spain are also WHITE Europeans and so are the Italians and every one else from any country with a boarder that touches the Mediterranean all the way up and including Turkey. Just because white Europeans started an illegal war of conquest with the indigenous people of south America does not give them any more rights to that land then the white European invaders that took North America by the use of force and biological warfare. Your reasoning boils down to , WHA WHA WHA we don't other people coming into the territory we illegally took from it's rightful owners and doing the same thing to us. IT just aint FAIR.

• Mark, what is it that you wish to do? Curb Illegal immigration? Then changing the 14th amendment is destined to be a colossal failure. Workers do not take enormous risks to come here because they want their children to become citizens, they come here because they want their children to live in something other than abject poverty and misery. They come here for jobs. Citizenship is a secondary consideration. They will not leave just because you changed the 14th amendment, nor will the change prevent them from coming here in the first place. Changing the 14th amendment will have little tangible effect on curbing illegal immigration. Do you wish to change the 14th amendment to punish those who do come over here illegally? If that is the case, then you are advocating for the punishment of the child for the crimes of the parent. What a disgustingly evil and un-American concept. Please clarify your ultimate goal here.

• Quote, Davetoo, "So unless you are 100% indigenous get the hell out of my country, you and all of you ancestors are illegals." So all black, white, asians and hispanic citizens should leave YOUR country? Since when is this YOUR country alone? Everyone born here according to PRESENT law is here legally. Just what tribe are you 100% indigenous to? My ancestors didn't come here illegally, they came through Ellis Island. No one is really iindigenous to this continent anyway. Even the first humans came from somewhere else. They didn't sprout up out of the ground like corn.

• The Lou Show 12 hours ago Mark: "You are an idiot. You've drunken the koolaid. You've been convinced by the separatists that the influx of undocumented have been an economic draw on services in this country. How can a mere (less than) 2% of the entire population be so expensive? More expensive than the lost worth of munitions fighting two undeclared wars? Why aren't you upset about the lost economics, literally in the trillions, of defense spending? Because you've bought into something that, in Arizona, will cause tax dollars to go into the pockets of our private prison industry, and which will keep the masses weak and divisive through a false civil war." Can't you lefties ever debate without the name calling? I haven't drank any kool-aid. I think for myself. Does that mean you have drunk the lefties kool-aid then? I couldn't care less what Pearce does or thinks. In my own mind birthright citizenship was never intended to be extended to children of illegal aliens. There was much evidence of this from the writer's of the 14th. Amendments have been made to our Constitution throughout our history. Nothing is set in stone forever. Most countries require that at least one parent be a citizen of their country in order for their newborn to be granted instant citizenship. What loyal American wants to extend birthright citizenship to children of parents who had no respect for our immigration laws and snuck in like theives in the night? I find it hypocritical that those like you have no problem suggesting that we change our immigration laws and even deny our government the right to enforce them in their present form but have a hissy fit at amending the Constitution. Why is that? You really like to ASSume, don't you? Where did I say that I approved of the Iraq war and the trillions of dollars spent on it? I never did and in fact I think it was a useless and expensive war. I couldn't stand Bush either. So stick that where the sun don't shine! Arizona has to incarcerate illegals somewhere and so do other states until ICE picks them up. Are you also opposed to American lawbreakers being incarcerated just because it costs money? I am for swift deporation of illegals rather than incarcerating them for long periods of time which is inhumane to them and also very costly to us. Perhaps you lefties should try to debate with civility and stop ASSuming things about others in here just because they don't share your point of view.

• Quote Davtoo, You are absolutely right Mark. "Since white European settlers ILLEGALLY grabbed land from the indigenous people, that makes all descendants of those and subsequent settlers ILLEGAL as well. So unless you are 100% indigenous get the hell out of my country, you and all of you ancestors are illegals." White Europeans? Are they the only ones liviing here? The U.S. paid Mexico millons of dollars to obtain certain southwest territories. As for prior to that it was the Spanish who conquered the indigenous from Mexico and these Mestizos have their blood coursing through their veins. As for the U.S. you will be hard pressed to find one descendant of the indigenous to THIS country that approves of this illegal invasion from mostly Mexico. We have treaties with those tribes. My ancestors didn't come here till the 1920's so they stole no land from anyone.

• Under Rusty Pearce's misbegotten definition, the Nisei children of Japanese immigrants (denied opportunity for naturalized citizenship due to racist immigration laws at that time) to Hawaii and the west coast who fought so valiantly to prove their loyalty as Americans in the 442nd Regimental Combat team and the 100th Battalion during the second World War would have been ... aliens. Medal of Honor winner Daniel Inoyue could not have served as Senator for Hawaii. George Ariyoshi could not have served as Hawaii's governor. What an ignorant, corrupt, hypocritical, hateful peckerwood is Rusty. But you knew that.

• You are absolutely right Mark. Since white European settlers ILLEGALLY grabbed land from the indigenous people, that makes all descendants of those and subsequent settlers ILLEGAL as well. So unless you are 100% indigenous get the hell out of my country, you and all of you ancestors are illegals.

• {sarcasm: on} Certainly. Anyone with an ancester who was born Before their parents were fully naturalized is at risk. Hell let's just declare that if your parents were naturalized, then you have to be naturalized as well. {roll eyes}

• Well and truthfully said Rob

• Well dinkus, by linking to Fred's site you have linked your self to white separatists. By using their arguments you have linked yourself to them. By your desire to change the 14th amendment you have linked yourself to them. Whether or not you want to admit it YOU ARE ONE OF THEM.

• Some of this dialog makes me wonder if I U.S. Citizen ship is at stake. I don't know if my ancestors immigrated to the U.S. legally some 170 years ago. The continuing illegal acts of my ancestors might have ultimately branded me an illegal immigrant. I think that Arpaio is the only person I know that can state that his parents came to the U.S. legally. But, let's see the papers Joe. Can Russell Pearce prove that there was not some illegal immigration in his heritage?

• Theloushow, Your post was very satisfying to read. Besides the laid out facts and state of affairs as they are, your strong expressive tone may have helped to get through to some of the dense and devious propagandists....a tone they understand.

• What do you call a child born in the United States of immigrant parents (documented or undocumented)? "Citizen"

• They should try to denied Pearce citizenship since his fucking stupid ass try to tamper a driving record and erase a DUI offense. This asshole says he follows the law but, broke one and now he want to tamper with the constitution. This fucking dipshit going down to be the worst politician in Arizona.

• Mark: You are an idiot. You've drunken the koolaid. You've been convinced by the separatists that the influx of undocumented have been an economic draw on services in this country. How can a mere (less than) 2% of the entire population be so expensive? More expensive than the lost worth of munitions fighting two undeclared wars? Why aren't you upset about the lost economics, literally in the trillions, of defense spending? Because you've bought into something that, in Arizona, will cause tax dollars to go into the pockets of our private prison industry, and which will keep the masses weak and divisive through a false civil war. You have drunk the koolaid, man! You say "children should not be rewarded". Another divisive tactic by F.A.I.R. And if you do not think there will be an even greater backlash against all of this racist Arizona legislation, you are a fool. Of course there is an anti-immigrant movement movement in this country. What do you think is behind SB1070, HB 2281, the ban of teachers the "accents", the proposed legislation to force teachers turn in students, and the revision/reinterpretation of the 14th Amendment? Are you blind? Indeed, it is Natavists, Separatists, Righties like you who continue to treat the US Constitution like a pick-n-choose buffet. Let me ask you something, IDIOT MARK . . . "What part of Rule of Law don't you understand?" The 14th Amendment of the United States is LAW. It will not be overturned. It will not be superseded. So stop trolling for F.A.I.R. The real enemies are the corporations, the military-industrial complex, and racist, hateful legislation. You can parse out anything you like, as much as you like. But you cannot argue against the perception of our current racist society . . . a society YOU seem to want to perpetuate. It will be easy to defeat idiots like you. Idiots like you like to use catch-phrases and lots of spin. But no argument can convince anyone against the flow of money.

• <b> As far back as 1886 in <i>Yick Wo v. Hopkins</i> the court found that:</b> ----- <i>"The rights of the petitioners, as affected by the proceedings of which they complain, are not less because they are aliens and subjects of the emperor of China… . The fourteenth amendment to the constitution is not confined to the protection of citizens. It says: ‘Nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.’ These provisions are universal in their application, to all persons within the territorial jurisdiction, without regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality; and the equal protection of the laws is a pledge of the protection of equal laws… . The questions we have to consider and decide in these cases, therefore, are to be treated as involving the rights of every citizen of the United States equally with those of the strangers and aliens who now invoke the jurisdiction of the court."</i> ----- <b>This was reafirmed just two years ago in <i>Boumediene v. Bush</i> when even Justice Scalia approvingly quoted Justice Jackson in conceding that foreigners detained inside the U.S. are protected by the Constitution:</b> ----- <i> “Justice Jackson then elaborated on the historical scope of the writ: ‘The alien, to whom the United States has been traditionally hospitable, has been accorded a generous and ascending scale of rights as he increases his identity with our society … . But, in extending constitutional protections beyond the citizenry, the Court has been at pains to point out that it was the alien’s presence within its territorial jurisdiction that gave the Judiciary power to act.’ Id., at 770–771.”</i> -------------

• No, all people on the territory of the U.S. are under the jurisdiction of U.S. laws.

• <i>"The way we are being overwhelmed with illegal aliens and their offspring should be of grave concern to all Americans not just Calfornians."</i> ====================== Actually the rate of illegal immigration has plummeted in recent years.

• Dawg, we're spitting into the wind. We will have to agree to disagree with Mark, I'm afraid.

• <i>"Why do you have a problem with another amendment?"</i> ---------------- Because such an amendment would be a major step backwards, and futile as well.

• It's not a reward, Mark. The child has no control of where the mother is when she gives birth. If she happens to be in the United States of America and gives birth then, by law, the child is a citizen, just as I became a citizen at birth. You can NOT like the current law, Mark, but it's not going to be changed, regardless of the efforts of pearce or your kind.

TotalComments: 100