Discussion for article #239679
A repost:
"Many people assume that their family immigrated to the U.S. legally, or did it “the right way.” In most cases, this statement does not reflect the fact that the U.S. immigration system was very different when their families arrived, and that their families might not have been allowed to enter had today’s laws been in effect. In some cases, claiming that a family came “legally” is simply inaccurate—undocumented immigration has been a reality for generations.
Whether one immigrated “legally” or “illegally” depends on the laws in effect at the time. When many families arrived in the U.S., there were no numerical limitations on immigration, no requirements to have an existing family or employment relationship with someone in the U.S., and no requirement to obtain a visa prior to arriving. As numerical limitations were instituted and certain immigrants were restricted from entering the U.S., illegal immigration increased. The definition of who was “legal” and who was “illegal” changed with the evolution of immigration laws.
Many of our ancestors would not have qualified under today’s immigration laws. Today’s requirements that potential immigrants have close family ties to qualified U.S. citizens or permanent residents, or have employment offers in particular fields, would have effectively restricted many of our families from coming legally to the U.S.
Until the late 19th century, there was very little federal regulation of immigration—there were virtually no laws to break. The new nation needed workers, and immigration was “encouraged and virtually unfettered.” There was no border surveillance to allow only those with proper documents to enter the U.S. Potential immigrants did not have to obtain visas at U.S. consulates before entering the country. Rather, immigrants would simply arrive at ports of entry (such as Ellis Island and other seaports), be inspected, and be allowed in if they didn’t fall into any of the excluded categories. "
10 Likes
Maher is a major league asshole but he did get one part right: “is any of this possible…no”
Nothing any of these GOP’ers propose on immigration is possible.
4 Likes
90% of what most Conservatives push these days is illegal or unconstitutional, but they don’t care.
I once informed a Republican that they were not a strict Constitutionalist because they refused to disband the army (only a permanent navy is allowed under a strict reading of the Constitution) nor would there be an NSA, FBI, CIA, or any of the law enforcement aparati that they love. Their guns could be taken away if they were not part of a militia.
By the time I was done, they were fuming. How dare I call out their bull.
9 Likes
The hardcore 25% of the horrible haters in the Republican party for Trump -
might as well put their guns to their heads and get it over with -
911 Reince Preibus suicide hotline - hello hello anyone there - bang !
1 Like
My mother and father came here through Ellis Island from Italy as young children with their parents in 1907 and 1909 respectively. I would be one of those people who could be deported to a country I never lived in.
3 Likes
I still like his show - asshole or not. I certainly relate to him and his stances in many ways
3 Likes
"Yes, Donald Trump, America’s great Irish hope,
Wiki sez:
Trump’s mother was a Scottish immigrant, born on the Isle of Lewis, off the west coast of Scotland.[21] Trump’s paternal grandparents were German immigrants;[22] Trump’s grandfather, Friedrich Drumpf, was a successful Klondike Gold Rush restaurateur who anglicized the family name.[23]
But then, who knows?
Maybe he’s already pissed-off the Scots and the Germans too.
jw1
With all due respect, I don’t think he has a core of beliefs or stances…Over the years he has just used anything that works at the time. This is why he is a good entertainer.
I disagree. I think he has many core beliefs. He is consistent on many of his beliefs or non-beliefs
3 Likes
"So, if you think crawling under a wall is the most disgusting way to become an American, somewhere there is a Panamanian woman hiding in a truck full of chickens with ten pounds of heroin-filled condoms in her stomach who’s thinking, ‘Well, at least I didn’t have to blow Donald Trump.'"
Well, that should set the ‘possum on Trump’s head to a’quiverin’
3 Likes
Chinchilla.
I stand corrected. However, chinchillas seem much cuter to me somehow.
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
Many (most?) of the Founders did not want a standing army, and given the history at the time, I don’t blame them. They trusted militias instead, which are the real reason for the 2nd Amendment, not the bullshit our “strict constructionists” made up in Heller. That distrust is also the reason for my favorite least controversial Amendment, the 3rd.
They feared a standing army would be abused by the Executive. But if Congress decides the fund the army every two years, or actually every year like they do now, to effectively have a standing army, does the Constitution actually forbid it?
2 Likes
…and stopping a federal practice…
No, it’s not a “federal pracice,” Sara, it’s a Constitutional right. There’s no “practice” by which the Feds drop by each birthing center and bestow citizenship; it is an adjudicated right. Reporters need to be very clear with the public on this. What the duplicitous Constitution-loving politicians are saying is that they want to ignore the Constitution.
"It’s a three-point plan called Cinco de Bye-o. Here are the plans: repeal the 14th amendment, seize the wages of illegal immigrants who are working here, use that money to build a wall, and then deport all 11 million of them. Is any of this possible? No. But it gave millions of Fox News viewers their first erection in years.”
This is comedy gold.
3 Likes
It’s the right-wing nut-job way: pull up the ladder someone provided for your ascent so no one else can ascend. Some people cannot feel successful if too many others succeed as well. It’s just another marker of the right wing’s essential lack of humanity.
1 Like
Now that John is gone I gotta get HBO. At this point Maher is the only one countering republican bs.
Two foreign wives. Women here know what an ass he is.
It’s kinda like Paul Ryan wanting to discontinue Pell Grants, which was the only way he could finance his college education when his family lost its breadwinner when he was growing up.
All for me; none for thee.
5 Likes
It’s not about the hypocrisy.
It’s about getting America to embrace your brand of hypocrisy as Gospel truth.
Or in 2016, sending your supporters to enforce your vision on your opponents.