TOP DEM PROF SAYS "I'VE NEVER SEEN ANY POLITICIAN WITH BETTER IMMIGRATION PLAN!"

[sirs]

Again, its simple for me.....and perfectly worded in the 14th.....any child born to a citizen who is completely subject to the jurisdiction of this country....which would include any LEGAL Immgrants/foreigners, receives birthright citizenship to the U.S.A.  And that could include either the mother or the father

This is why the a case needs to be brought before the Supreme Court, for an updated interpretation of the present Federal Statutes, to put this to rest 

----------------------------------------------

Not to mention there are 2 other means that can be applied at the same time that will absolutely start bring back into control our borders and the flood of illegal immigrants.
- An actual physical wall.  NO, it won't stop all, but it'll put a significant choke on the effort.  Not to mention, is supported by a majority of the population
- Actual enforcement of immigration laws.....which includes defunding sanctuary cities, and punishing large scale employers of low wage illegal immigrants

---------------------------------------------

Those rather 3 simple acts alone, would absolutely bring back control of our southern border, with no need for militarizing the border, or mass deportations.  All 3 would also lead to people self deporting, if there are no jobs to be had, because employers of illegal immigrants are being fined/jailed, cities could no longer be able to bare the financial toll of keeping illegal immigrants, and there was no more anchor baby madness

What we ALSO need to do, is to streamline the current immigration process....it takes WAY too long in its current state.  Whatever bureaucratic nightmares have been imposed, needs to be taken down, to allow those who want to come here an incentive to abide by our laws, and not break them.  THIS is what "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" would look like

Is there any candidate running on such an immigration reform platform??

[Plane]

Rasmussen Reports Polling Data:
April 1-2, 2015
"Suppose a woman enters the United States as an illegal alien and gives birth to a child in the United States. Should that child automatically become a citizen of the United States?"

Yes: 38%
No: 54%

  I don't mind being in a minority opinion.
   What happens to persons born outside their parents home country , and without proper birth certificate?

     We don't need to create a class of noncitizens , who belong exactly nowhere.

     

[sirs]

They simply belong with their parents, Plane

[Christians4LessGvt]

I don't mind being in a minority opinion.  What happens to persons born outside their parents home country ,
and without proper birth certificate?  We don't need to create a class of noncitizens , who belong exactly nowhere.

#1. many, many, many, many would not come if they didn't get a reward for coming.

#2. they go home with the parents and sort it out....just like almost every other developed country says no to anchor babies.
our rights trump foreigners and illegals having babies on our dime.
hell they should be thrilled to get the baby delivered free on the American taxpayer!

[Xavier_Onassis]

Trump's paln would be very expensive, divisive and will not work.

The rest of the GOP  candidates have no plan at all.

It is not possible to deport American citizens. Laws in this country cannot be retroactive

[Christians4LessGvt]

Trump's paln would be very expensive, divisive and will not work.

It's expensive and divisive to allow illegality to prevail.

It is not possible to deport American citizens. Laws in this country cannot be retroactive

I am fine with stopping anchor babies tomorrow....
but whats funny is how it can only be a one way street
millions upon millions upon millions can come in
but heaven forbid no possible way they can go the other way out!
it's a joke....millions can only come one way....but not go back?
It's insanity and defies logic.

[sirs]

I am fine with stopping anchor babies tomorrow....
but whats funny is how it can only be a one way street
millions upon millions upon millions can come in
but heaven forbid no possible way they can go the other way out!
it's a joke....millions can only come one way....but not go back?
It's insanity and defies logic.

You'll have to consider the source

[Xavier_Onassis]

If citizens can be deported against their will, so can you. Revoking citizenship for just existing is a very slippery slope.

They could solve the anchor baby problem (assuming that is IS a problem) with a Constitutional amendment, I mere law would not work, because by law everyone born here is a citizen, period.

Most of the "anchor babies" come from China.The parents are generally middle class, because they can get a visa. The US does not hand out visas to everyone. Not all, perhaps not even most, of these  American-born Chinese will actually come here to live. Being born ins the US is seen as a sort of insurance against bad times in China

Anchor babies can go out as well as in. Every years there are thousands of people who COULD live here and are citizens, choose not to and go elsewhere. There are people who really do self deport themselves.

[Plane]

Anchor babies can go out as well as in. Every years there are thousands of people who COULD live here and are citizens, choose not to and go elsewhere. There are people who really do self deport themselves.

  What describes most of these people?

[Plane]

..............Cleveland will rock...........

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/maybe-this-time-really-is-different/ar-BBlXUUu

believe that Trump has a ceiling of support around his current levels of roughly 25 percent. But if other insurgents like Cruz and Carson have their own support nearing a combined 25 percent, why can’t Trump potentially garner a solid share of their backing if they falter?

  I am just old enough to remember back when Party conventions were not a waste of time.

If the Cleveland convention is fractious and requires multiple ballots , blame Donald Trump.

If the Republican convention is interesting , would anyone watch the Dem convention?


 

[Xavier_Onassis]

The conventions will be, as they have been for a long, long, time, promos for the parties, and I imagine that they will be equally exciting. By the time the convention comes around, there will be many, many candidates will drop out, mostly for lack of money, or perhaps because of scandal, and there is a high probability that the candidate will already be chosen.

As for giving a name for people who prefer to live in some other country besides this one, each person has his/her own reasons and they probably have much to do with personal relationships , like spousal relationships, homesickness, a desire to live among family more than other things. Politics is probably far down the list for many.

Costa Rica has rather exciting politics, and so does Uruguay. In small countries, your single vote is vastly more powerful: one in three million or four million rather than one in three hundred million. Both these countries are free, have a free press and a lot of creative people.

[Plane]

The conventions will be, as they have been for a long, long, time, promos for the parties,....

   This is precisely what the party leaders want , the wealthy backers , the oligarchy.

    Why should I want such a thing?

[Xavier_Onassis]

At what point did I say that  the party bosses want to please you or the public?

The fact that we have but two parties and they determine the fate of the country makes their conventions a matter of interest.

I would prefer to see a mud wrestling match between the candidates. It would not be more informative, but then nothing anyone says at a convention is all that informative. I recall the GOP endorsing the Brickell Amendment in 1952, 1956, 1960 and perhaps even 1964. This is the only mention of it anyone outside the Beltway ever heard. It was never passed nor close to passing. There was a lot of talk about "busing" for a long time as well.

[sirs]

If citizens can be deported against their will, so can you. Revoking citizenship for just existing is a very slippery slope.

Good thing no one is pushing to "revoke citizenship".  Nor are "citizens deported".  That'd be an oxy moron.  Those who are here illegally, can and should be deported.  But that's a whole different ball of wax

They could solve the anchor baby problem (assuming that is IS a problem) with a Constitutional amendment, I mere law would not work, because by law everyone born here is a citizen, period.

And any law would not be required to be retroactive.  The law can simply say "as of this date".  Problem solved.  Of course, we all understand why you're trying to make this much grander and harder than it would be.....to infer some great non-existent tragedy, with all these mass deportations of supposedly legal citizens

And no, most of these anchor babies are coming directly from Mexico & Central America.  China comes in a distant third, as it relates to ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS giving birth to children, in this country.  We're not going to let you get away with trying to meld ILLEGAL with LEGAL immigrants.  This WHOLE debate is about ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, and the children they give birth to.  Your own Wong case settled that issue, long ago

[Xavier_Onassis]

Trump proposes sending the American-born children back with their families.  "They gotta go.", he says.

That is not going to happen. It cannot happen. Trump should be smart enough to know that, but apparently he isn't, or he is deliberately appraling to people who aren't, who are legion among his followers.

Trump is the most divisive creep in our politics since Jesse Helms and George Wallace.